Opponent refused to putt in tournament play.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by David in FL

I have a 2 inch tap in.  I tap it in.  I've played out of turn, but there certainly isn't any down-side because no opponent is going to require me to replay the shot, and if they did, there's no chance that I'd miss it.

By tapping in the putt and speeding up the overall pace of play, doing so "made sense"......

True, good point.  [On a side note, don't you have the right to finish if that 2 inch putt originated from a shot from the green, even in match play?  Assuming yes, then in most cases you are not breaking the rule and your opponent does NOT have the right to make you replay even if your second putt was made from 6 feet]

My point was that I asked the rule be explained to a NEW golfer who likely does not understand the difference between competitor, opponent, match play or stroke play.  Also, even with your tap in example, your explanation is still inconsistent with how RayG and Fourputt are advising us to play.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by MEfree

Quote:

Originally Posted by David in FL

The person who is furthest away from the hole plays first.  If you play out of turn, your opponent has the option of requiring you to replay your stroke......or not.

It's just not that hard....

Easy, so it never makes sense to play out of turn.

Not so.  In the US, at least 99% of all play is stroke play.  I'd say that half or more of the players encountered any weekend on any public course in the use wouldn't even know what you meant by match play.  So worrying about playing out of turn is mostly irrelevant.  There can only be a penalty if the competitors agreed to waive the rule, and then it would be disqualification which is mostly irrelevant in casual play.  Agreeing to play ready golf does not come under this umbrella, as you have not agreed to waive the rule or play out of turn for any advantage other than being able to more easily keep pace with the field.

Originally Posted by MEfree

Quote:

Originally Posted by David in FL

I have a 2 inch tap in.  I tap it in.  I've played out of turn, but there certainly isn't any down-side because no opponent is going to require me to replay the shot, and if they did, there's no chance that I'd miss it.

By tapping in the putt and speeding up the overall pace of play, doing so "made sense"......

True, good point.  [On a side note, don't you have the right to finish if that 2 inch putt originated from a shot from the green, even in match play?  Assuming yes, then in most cases you are not breaking the rule and your opponent does NOT have the right to make you replay even if your second putt was made from 6 feet]

My point was that I asked the rule be explained to a NEW golfer who likely does not understand the difference between competitor, opponent, match play or stroke play.  Also, even with your tap in example, your explanation is still inconsistent with how RayG and Fourputt are advising us to play.

We advised it for casual golf played under stroke rules as a part of playing ready golf.  This is not a breach unless it is done for one player to gain an advantage, as the rule clearly states.

[David in FL]

Originally Posted by MEfree

True, good point.  [On a side note, don't you have the right to finish if that 2 inch putt originated from a shot from the green, even in match play?  Assuming yes, then in most cases you are not breaking the rule and your opponent does NOT have the right to make you replay even if your second putt was made from 6 feet]

My point was that I asked the rule be explained to a NEW golfer who likely does not understand the difference between competitor, opponent, match play or stroke play.  Also, even with your tap in example, your explanation is still inconsistent with how RayG and Fourputt are advising us to play.

Not quite.  The rules do not inherently provide for the right to finish, UNLESS your opponent asks that you mark your ball.  Then you have the right to putt rather than marking and lifting.....

Decision 10-2b/1 applies:

10-2b/1

Competitor Objects to Fellow-Competitor Putting Out of Turn

Q. In stroke play, A's ball is 40 feet from the hole and B's is 30 feet away. A putts and his ball comes to rest four feet from the hole. A prepares to hole out before B putts. B objects and claims that under the Rules (Rule 10-2b ) he is entitled to putt before A.

Although putting out of turn in stroke play is generally condoned, should the Committee allow A to putt out of turn in these circumstances?

A. If A had lifted his ball when the objection was lodged, the Committee should rule that A is not entitled to putt out of turn, in view of Rule 10-2b .

If A had not lifted his ball at the time the objection was lodged, the answer depends on whether B would require A to lift his ball under Rule 22 (Ball Assisting or Interfering with Play) before he (B) putts. If so, the Committee should rule that A is entitled to play out of turn, provided he does so without first lifting his ball, i.e., Rule 22-2 permits a competitor in stroke play who is required to lift his ball because of interference to "play first rather than lift."

If B would not require A to lift his ball before he (B) putts, the Committee should rule that A is not entitled to putt out of turn.

Although condoning putting out of turn in stroke play may be questionable in view of the explicit language of Rule 10-2b , there is no penalty for doing so (Rule 10-2c ), it is not in conflict with the intent of Rule 10-2b , and it may tend to speed play. Accordingly, it is considered that the practice should not be discouraged.

I don't find any of this inconsistent with what the others have said......

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Not so.  In the US, at least 99% of all play is stroke play.  I'd say that half or more of the players encountered any weekend on any public course in the use wouldn't even know what you meant by match play.  So worrying about playing out of turn is mostly irrelevant.  There can only be a penalty if the competitors agreed to waive the rule, and then it would be disqualification which is mostly irrelevant in casual play.  Agreeing to play ready golf does not come under this umbrella, as you have not agreed to waive the rule or play out of turn for any advantage other than being able to more easily keep pace with the field.

We advised it for casual golf played under stroke rules as a part of playing ready golf.  This is not a breach unless it is done for one player to gain an advantage, as the rule clearly states.

So should a NEW golfer, who was going to play mostly casual rounds but at some point play in a competitive match play situation, follow David's explanation of order of play?  i.e. the guy farther from the hole should go first except in situations in which you are very close to the hole so that there is no chance that you would miss the shot and be asked to replay.

FWIW, I disagree that 99% of US play is stroke play.  At the course I grew up playing almost all the betting was done on a match play basis.  Similar at many of the other local clubs.  The club championship was stroke play when I was there, but there was also a (net) match play club championship and a match play "Gold Cup" partners tournament (which was considered the biggest of the year for the mid to high cappers).  Since I left, I believe they switched the Men's Club Championship to an 18 or 36 hole stroke play qualifier with the low 8? going on to match play (all gross).  At Keystone, both the employee and passholder summer tournaments are match play (net).  Match play might not be the majority, but even the PGA Tour has a bit more than 1% match play.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by MEfree

So should a NEW golfer, who was going to play mostly casual rounds but at some point play in a competitive match play situation, follow David's explanation of order of play?  i.e. the guy farther from the hole should go first except in situations in which you are very close to the hole so that there is no chance that you would miss the shot and be asked to replay.

Normally I like the way you think on some of these different rules issues - inasmuch as you are simply avoiding the "its this way cuz its always been this way" line of thinking and trying to be open minded - but this is just getting ridiculous.  It's almost troll-ish, like you are just coming up with stupid ways to get fourputt and David to keep taking you seriously and respond.  I'm sorry, but it's just dumb.  There is nothing, repeat: NOTHING, even remotely complicated about this rule.  Furthest away plays first in match play, and in stroke play, which most of us here play, let's keep things moving and play ready golf.  In my tournament on Sunday there were a couple of situations where 2 of us were on the green waiting for the third, and when he missed up his bunker shot and skied it across the green to the other bunker, rather than standing there and waiting for him to rush and screw up again, we went ahead and hit our putts, allowing him a chance to rake the bunker, seethe a little, calm down, and then go hit a better shot the next time.

If you are a new golfer, you aren't playing match play, and if you are, you are learning the rules for match play.  I have never played a serious match play tournament, but if and when I ever do ... guess what?  I'm gonna have a little rules cram session and make sure that going into it I know all I think I need to know regarding match play rules.

[luu5]

Originally Posted by MEfree

So should a NEW golfer, who was going to play mostly casual rounds but at some point play in a competitive match play situation, follow David's explanation of order of play?  i.e. the guy farther from the hole should go first except in situations in which you are very close to the hole so that there is no chance that you would miss the shot and be asked to replay.

What is your opinion on this? You play with HC 8.6. How would you play and why?

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by MEfree

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Not so.  In the US, at least 99% of all play is stroke play.  I'd say that half or more of the players encountered any weekend on any public course in the use wouldn't even know what you meant by match play.  So worrying about playing out of turn is mostly irrelevant.  There can only be a penalty if the competitors agreed to waive the rule, and then it would be disqualification which is mostly irrelevant in casual play.  Agreeing to play ready golf does not come under this umbrella, as you have not agreed to waive the rule or play out of turn for any advantage other than being able to more easily keep pace with the field.

We advised it for casual golf played under stroke rules as a part of playing ready golf.  This is not a breach unless it is done for one player to gain an advantage, as the rule clearly states.

So should a NEW golfer, who was going to play mostly casual rounds but at some point play in a competitive match play situation, follow David's explanation of order of play?  i.e. the guy farther from the hole should go first except in situations in which you are very close to the hole so that there is no chance that you would miss the shot and be asked to replay.

FWIW, I disagree that 99% of US play is stroke play.  At the course I grew up playing almost all the betting was done on a match play basis.  Similar at many of the other local clubs.  The club championship was stroke play when I was there, but there was also a (net) match play club championship and a match play "Gold Cup" partners tournament (which was considered the biggest of the year for the mid to high cappers).  Since I left, I believe they switched the Men's Club Championship to an 18 or 36 hole stroke play qualifier with the low 8? going on to match play (all gross).  At Keystone, both the employee and passholder summer tournaments are match play (net).  Match play might not be the majority, but even the PGA Tour has a bit more than 1% match play.

No.  If he plans to play in a competitive situation he should learn the rules before he does so.  Failure to do so is his problem, not his opponent's.  In match play you are still allowed to play out of turn if your opponent allows it to save time in a tap in situation.  In fact, in match play, most tap ins are conceded anyway, it's always been a moot point in any matches I've played.  Even when playing someone new to match play, I will ask if the putt is conceded.  In the one case where he wasn't even aware of that option, I explained it to him and on the next tee, I showed him the rule while we waited for the fairway to clear.  I don't think I've ever been required to putt from less that 2 feet except for one time when I actually missed from less than a foot (and still halved the hole).

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Normally I like the way you think on some of these different rules issues - inasmuch as you are simply avoiding the "its this way cuz its always been this way" line of thinking and trying to be open minded - but this is just getting ridiculous.  It's almost troll-ish, like you are just coming up with stupid ways to get fourputt and David to keep taking you seriously and respond.  I'm sorry, but it's just dumb.  There is nothing, repeat: NOTHING, even remotely complicated about this rule.  Furthest away plays first in match play, and in stroke play, which most of us here play, let's keep things moving and play ready golf.  In my tournament on Sunday there were a couple of situations where 2 of us were on the green waiting for the third, and when he missed up his bunker shot and skied it across the green to the other bunker, rather than standing there and waiting for him to rush and screw up again, we went ahead and hit our putts, allowing him a chance to rake the bunker, seethe a little, calm down, and then go hit a better shot the next time.

If you are a new golfer, you aren't playing match play, and if you are, you are learning the rules for match play.  I have never played a serious match play tournament, but if and when I ever do ... guess what?  I'm gonna have a little rules cram session and make sure that going into it I know all I think I need to know regarding match play rules.

I appreciate your support in other threads and agree with most of what you say.

For an experienced golfer, you are right that order of play usually takes care of itself with no issues arising.  My point was simply why would you have to have a cram session to learn match play rules and why would an intelligent player like Annika get it wrong in a critical situation?  My answer is that you are both asked to play one way most of the time and another infrequently.  My response was that the match play rules could be tweaked to make it more consistent with how most of us normally play (guys off the green go before guys on the green), but everyone called this heresy.  I couldn't understand why this was such a bad idea and most of the criticism (except yours with your opinion about my proposal being more confusing) seemed more like personal attacks rather than helping me to understand why my thinking was wrong.

[Slice of Life]

Originally Posted by MEfree

So should a NEW golfer, who was going to play mostly casual rounds but at some point play in a competitive match play situation, follow David's explanation of order of play?  i.e. the guy farther from the hole should go first except in situations in which you are very close to the hole so that there is no chance that you would miss the shot and be asked to replay.

I'd say so. Less than a foot, and they can ask me to replay it 100 times...it'll just help me work on my stroke and confidence while I nail 100 straight putts.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by MEfree

For an experienced golfer, you are right that order of play usually takes care of itself with no issues arising.  My point was simply why would you have to have a cram session to learn match play rules and why would an intelligent player like Annika get it wrong in a critical situation?  My answer is that you are both asked to play one way most of the time and another infrequently.  My response was that the match play rules could be tweaked to make it more consistent with how most of us normally play (guys off the green go before guys on the green), but everyone called this heresy.  I couldn't understand why this was such a bad idea and most of the criticism (except yours with your opinion about my proposal being more confusing) seemed more like personal attacks rather than helping me to understand why my thinking was wrong.

Because everyone has brain farts.  No other reason is necessary.  Everyone ever born has done something stupid that that he or she regretted.  No other answer is required.  Annika would likely tell you the same thing.

Originally Posted by Slice of Life

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree

So should a NEW golfer, who was going to play mostly casual rounds but at some point play in a competitive match play situation, follow David's explanation of order of play?  i.e. the guy farther from the hole should go first except in situations in which you are very close to the hole so that there is no chance that you would miss the shot and be asked to replay.

I'd say so. Less than a foot, and they can ask me to replay it 100 times...it'll just help me work on my stroke and confidence while I nail 100 straight putts.

No, it won't, because once the stroke is recalled, you would be required to play in proper order the next time.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by luu5

What is your opinion on this? You play with HC 8.6. How would you play and why?

How-

Person farthest from the hole off the green goes first.  When everyone has reached the green, the person farthest from the hole goes first and has the option of finishing his putt so long as he is not standing in anyone else's line.  I would leave the penalties for a breach UNCHANGED from the current rules.

Why-

I think this is consistent with good speed of play and is similar to how most of us play on an everyday basis.  We already make a distinction between on and off the green (i.e. being able to mark/clean your ball and not being able to hit the stick on the green), so I don't think this is any harder to understand than farthest from the hole plays first.

[David in FL]

Originally Posted by MEfree

If you were going to explain order of play to a new golfer who was going to play mostly casual rounds but at some point was going to play in a competitive match play situation, how would you explain it to him?

Originally Posted by MEfree

So should a NEW golfer, who was going to play mostly casual rounds but at some point play in a competitive match play situation, follow David's explanation of order of play?  i.e. the guy farther from the hole should go first except in situations in which you are very close to the hole so that there is no chance that you would miss the shot and be asked to replay.

FWIW, I disagree that 99% of US play is stroke play.  At the course I grew up playing almost all the betting was done on a match play basis.  Similar at many of the other local clubs.  The club championship was stroke play when I was there, but there was also a (net) match play club championship and a match play "Gold Cup" partners tournament (which was considered the biggest of the year for the mid to high cappers).  Since I left, I believe they switched the Men's Club Championship to an 18 or 36 hole stroke play qualifier with the low 8? going on to match play (all gross).  At Keystone, both the employee and passholder summer tournaments are match play (net).  Match play might not be the majority, but even the PGA Tour has a bit more than 1% match play.

You asked a very specific question in the first post above.....how would I explain the rule to a new golfer who would be playing competitive match play at some point.  You then asked if I agreed that it never "made sense" to play out of turn.  I gave a very easy example of one situation where it didn't "make sense".   I never said that there weren't many other times when it wouldn't also be completely acceptable/appropriate for the closer player to play first.  Especially in stroke play.

Nothing I've said is inconsistent with anything Fourputt has said here.....

[Golfingdad]

I'm going all "Erik style" on this one ;) ...

Originally Posted by MEfree

My point was simply why would you have to have a cram session to learn match play rules and why would an intelligent player like Annika get it wrong in a critical situation?

I wouldn't necessarily have to have a cram session.  But I would just want to try my best to cover all of my bases.  Realize that no matter how much you try and make it "the same" for match vs. stroke, its always going to be vastly different.  (In that, penalties are frequently "hole" penalties rather than stroke penalties, simply by the nature of the competition)

And as far as Annika is concerned ... why can't it just be chalked up to her having made a mistake?  Further, from some of the earlier descriptions on this thread (thats all I have, because I don't know of this incident), it sounds like it was a mistake in judgment as opposeed to rules.  As in, it was close as to who was away and she judged it was her without getting confirmation.  So, if you made the rules "easier" by requiring furthest from the hole goes first, even in stroke play, how would that change her careless judgment in a match play event?

Originally Posted by MEfree

My answer is that you are both asked to play one way most of the time and another infrequently.

But you could still play that way in stroke play if you wanted.  It's just in everybody's best interest (usually) to keep things moving and play ready golf.  I say usually, because like my above example, if a playing competitor hits onto the green and is still away, so long as he's not in my way, I'll go ahead and putt and give him time to compose himself, rake the bunker, etc.  However, if his bunker shot ends up right behind my ball where he would give me a perfect line for my putt ... well then, I'm probably going to go ahead and take advantage of the 'rule' and wait for him to putt before I go. :)

Originally Posted by MEfree

My response was that the match play rules could be tweaked to make it more consistent with how most of us normally play (guys off the green go before guys on the green), but everyone called this heresy.

Because it is heresy.  You are direct opponents with each other, so there has to be strict rules on playing order.  This sounds like a silly example, (I don't think it is) but forcing somebody to play out of turn would not be that different from asking Nadal to go ahead and return Federer's serve before Federer actually serves.  Every strategy decision is at least partially predicated on what your opponent has just done.

Originally Posted by MEfree

I couldn't understand why this was such a bad idea and most of the criticism (except yours with your opinion about my proposal being more confusing) seemed more like personal attacks rather than helping me to understand why my thinking was wrong.

Well, I don't know if I'd call them "attacks" but I get your point here.   You have kind of developed a reputation recently as "the guy who wants to simplify the rules" so that has been mentioned a few times and people probably can't help but frame their opinion partially on that information.

We all have reps like that, I'm sure.  I'm probably "the guy who agrees with Erik too much about bounce," or "the guy who recommends Evolvr all the time" to some people.  (Or maybe even "the fat guy who never stops talking" to some people)  Who knows?  ;)

I wouldn't take it too seriously.  (Just like I hope you don't take my earlier "attack" too seriously.  I hesitated to even mention the word 'troll' because its usually reserved for a-hole spammers and the like - which I don't consider you at all - but this topic seemed pretty straightforward to me, thats all)

[MEfree]

Because it is heresy.  You are direct opponents with each other, so there has to be strict rules on playing order.  This sounds like a silly example, (I don't think it is) but forcing somebody to play out of turn would not be that different from asking Nadal to go ahead and return Federer's serve before Federer actually serves.  Every strategy decision is at least partially predicated on what your opponent has just done.

I agree that there has to be strict rules on playing order in match play.  I didn't propose otherwise.  What I proposed would have strict match play rules that would have the same player go first about 98% of the time as the current match play rules while at the same time being more consistent with how RayG and Fourputt recommend we play regularly. The only time it would be different than how it is currently done in match play is when you have a guy on farther from the hole than a guy off the green.

Trackster hit the nail on the head in post 61

Originally Posted by trackster

All it really affects is who get's the advantage.  Like MEfree said it would just give it to the person on the green.  However I think that the person closest should have the advantage.  Just my 2 cents.

I respect that he feels the advantage should rest with the person closer rather than the person on the green. but this doesn't come up that often and in many instances the person on the green might actually be in a preferable position, so why should the guy off get the advantage when it means that we have to have play contrary to how RayG and Fourputt recommend to accomplish this.

For those who don't think I understand match play, consider the following-

1.  I played 6 JR Team Match play matches each summer for at least 5 years.

2.  I was seeded higher (based on qualifying score) but lost to Bob May (think 2000 PGA playoff with Tiger Woods) in the So Cal Jr Match Play Championships.

3.  About 70% of my competitive rounds have been played under match play conditions if you count friendly wagers.

I agree that it is an advantage to see your opponent go first, so maybe the solution is to NOT penalize the player who gives up this advantage and hits first when it is really their opponent who should have gone first.  Annika's opponent got the advantage of knowing that Annika made her shot when there was still something she could do about it (i.e. make sure she gets her putt to the hole), so why give her the additional advantage of having Annika replay.  Maybe the better solution is not what I first proposed, but is to only penalize a player who refuses to play when it is their turn and not penalize a player who hits too soon (and leave the farthest from the hole plays first unchanged)...this ties in nicely with the OPs situation.

Of course, critics will argue that sometimes playing first is an advantage as a good shot can put added pressure on your opponent, so maybe my first thought is better.

[David in FL]

Originally Posted by MEfree

I agree that there has to be strict rules on playing order in match play.  I didn't propose otherwise.  What I proposed would have strict match play rules that would have the same player go first about 98% of the time as the current match play rules while at the same time being more consistent with how RayG and Fourputt recommend we play regularly. The only time it would be different than how it is currently done in match play is when you have a guy on farther from the hole than a guy off the green.

Trackster hit the nail on the head in post 61

I respect that he feels the advantage should rest with the person closer rather than the person on the green. but this doesn't come up that often and in many instances the person on the green might actually be in a preferable position, so why should the guy off get the advantage when it means that we have to have play contrary to how RayG and Fourputt recommend to accomplish this.

For those who don't think I understand match play, consider the following-

1.  I played 6 JR Team Match play matches each summer for at least 5 years.

2.  I was seeded higher (based on qualifying score) but lost to Bob May (think 2000 PGA playoff with Tiger Woods) in the So Cal Jr Match Play Championships.

3.  About 70% of my competitive rounds have been played under match play conditions if you count friendly wagers.

I agree that it is an advantage to see your opponent go first, so maybe the solution is to NOT penalize the player who gives up this advantage and hits first when it is really their opponent who should have gone first.  Annika's opponent got the advantage of knowing that Annika made her shot when there was still something she could do about it (i.e. make sure she gets her putt to the hole), so why give her the additional advantage of having Annika replay.  Maybe the better solution is not what I first proposed, but is to only penalize a player who refuses to play when it is their turn and not penalize a player who hits too soon (and leave the farthest from the hole plays first unchanged)...this ties in nicely with the OPs situation.

Of course, critics will argue that sometimes playing first is an advantage as a good shot can put added pressure on your opponent, so maybe my first thought is better.

Or we could just stick with the current rules, which are simple, and just fine as they are......

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by MEfree

...  Maybe the better solution ...

Solution to what?  For there to be a "solution," doesn't there first have to be a problem?  Be honest; If you were to start a poll (I'm not saying to start one, just asking you to use your imagination) and ask the forum how many people think there is a "problem" with the rules in regards to order of play, how many people (or percentage, perhaps) would vote yes?  I'm going to guess it's very, very low.

Originally Posted by David in FL

Or we could just stick with the current rules, which are simple, and just fine as they are......

Ummm, yes, this times 1000. ;)

[turtleback]

8,437,835,421

That is the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.

Which makes a hell of a lot more sense than this "debate" we've been drawn into.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Solution to what?  For there to be a "solution," doesn't there first have to be a problem?  Be honest; If you were to start a poll (I'm not saying to start one, just asking you to use your imagination) and ask the forum how many people think there is a "problem" with the rules in regards to order of play, how many people (or percentage, perhaps) would vote yes?  I'm going to guess it's very, very low.

Ummm, yes, this times 1000. ;)

You are right that this is a pretty trivial rule and that most here don't see it as a problem.  I guess I just don't like having rules that are routinely violated (but with no penalty for this one) even by serious players.  Other examples including players who drop a ball when they unexpectedly lose one or play a "provisional" when they hit into a hazard.  The common element in all of these is that knowledgeable players frequently violate these rules for speed of play considerations.  I guess I am in the minority, but I would rather have a rule book that is consistent with how serious and knowledgeable players actually play when they are engaging in friendly competition with their buddies.

Originally Posted by Dormie1360

I see this done a lot, and it's wrong.  A person plays a provisional, not because he thinks it's might be lost outside the hazard, but plays a provisional to save time in case it did go into in the hazard and the player knows that his only option in that case would be to replay the stroke.  He does this to save time.....walking to the other side of the hazard, seeing the ball is in the hazard, and then having to walk back to where he played his last stroke.

You can not play a provisional for this type of situation unless a local rule specifically authorizing it.  As Fourputt said, if you do without a local rule, your second ball becomes the ball in play as soon as you make a stroke at it.

As far as the local rule, I've never seen it on a club's scorecard, but I guess it's out there.  Maybe it shows up more in tournaments.

Quote:

Originally Posted by David in FL

Yep.......confession time.

I understand the rule, I understand the reasoning for the rule, and I absolutely agree with both.  Yet, I admit that my group violates the rule (non-tournament rounds of course) on one particular hole at our home course in the interest of expediency.

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Right.  While I commend Mefree for wanting to play by all of the rules, all of the time, it seems like in this case there was nothing left to gain.  He wasn't going to shoot a personal best.  Nothing he did after that whiff was going to result in anything under an ESC score anyway, so I would have just gone to the ball in the fairway to finish the hole, then mark my 7, and go home.  I would have actually taken it one step further and just counted my provisional as a second tee shot.  As soon as I decided that my best option was to go re-tee, I would have, in the interest of time and out of courtesy to others, just played the one that was already in the fairway.  I understand that that would not fly in a tournament, but in a casual round I'm playing by myself where nothing is on the line, the fact that I've already hit a shot from the correct location would be good enough.