Matt Kuchar allowed to repair an irregularity on the putting surface?

[Rulesman]

I wonder if the ruling was made by the committee under 1-4 in equity using the various decisions in rule 33-1 or 2

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by Rulesman

I wonder if the ruling was made by the committee under 1-4 in equity using the various decisions in rule 33-1 or 2

I think you must be correct as his ball was off the green and the damage occurred before his ball came to rest- this seems to make much of the quoted decisions not quite on point.

Let's suppose a player is playing in their Club Championship and encountered a similar situation.  How should this be handled if it was not possible to contact the committee prior to the stroke being made?  Should rule 3-3 be invoked with the first putt being made with the green as is and the 2nd ball be played from the same spot after the mark is repaired?  Who should repair the damage to the green?

What if it was a very deep deer or elk track instead of a spot where someone had slammed their putter into the green?

Quote:

c. Repair of Hole Plugs, Ball Marks and Other Damage

The player may repair an old hole plug or damage to the putting green caused by the impact of a ball, whether or not the player’s ball lies on the putting green. If a ball or ball-marker is accidentally moved in the process of the repair, the ball or ball-marker must be replaced. There is no penalty, provided the movement of the ball or ball-marker is directly attributable to the specific act of repairing an old hole plug or damage to the putting green caused by the impact of a ball. Otherwise, Rule 18 applies.

Any other damage to the putting green must not be repaired if it might assist the player in his subsequent play of the hole.

I thought I remember something about only being able to fix your own ball mark when your ball is off the green.  Are you allowed to fix all ball marks when your ball is off the green or just your own ball mark?

edit- never mind- I see that you can repair your own ball mark off the green, but not marks that are off the green of others, so if you were on the fringe with a mark that wasn't yours also on the fringe, you must wait until after you putt to fix this mark.

[Dormie1360]

Originally Posted by Rulesman

I wonder if the ruling was made by the committee under 1-4 in equity using the various decisions in rule 33-1 or 2

I'm curious what the ruling on this was, you may be correct.  The damage was there before Kuchar's ball came to rest.  Even if the committee deemed it an AGC, the ball lay off the green, so no relief under R25.  I think the committee would, in any case, repair the damage after Kuchar played.

[Asheville]

Originally Posted by Dormie1360

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rulesman

I wonder if the ruling was made by the committee under 1-4 in equity using the various decisions in rule 33-1 or 2

I'm curious what the ruling on this was, you may be correct.  The damage was there before Kuchar's ball came to rest.  Even if the committee deemed it an AGC, the ball lay off the green, so no relief under R25.  I think the committee would, in any case, repair the damage after Kuchar played.

This particular committee is comprised of employees of the PGA Tour. "No," sometimes isn't a good answer.

[Big C]

Not to mention, Kuchar completely collapsed after the favorable ruling - striking a terrible putt from the fringe and promptly triple bogeying the next hole. Kuchar seems like one of the better guys on tour. I think he knew he had "gotten away" with one here and it showed in his play afterward. My guess is that if he had to do it over again, he wouldn't have called the official at all.

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by Dormie1360

Not sure if you are saying you can fix a putter mark, but you can not.

Saw the telecast.  At first Slugger, (rules guy), was not going to give relief  Said something about not knowing how/where he would move the ball,  the ball was off the green I believe.  Kuchar protested and Slugger got on the radio.  Next thing we see, Slugger is repairing the green.  FWIW, Feherty  said afterwards he was told by Slugger it was determined that the damage was excessive so he repaired it.  I believe the comment was that it was more than a putter mark made by someone leaning on their club.  Looked like some one banged the green with a putter.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by MEfree

edit- never mind- I see that you can repair your own ball mark off the green, but not marks that are off the green of others, so if you were on the fringe with a mark that wasn't yours also on the fringe, you must wait until after you putt to fix this mark.

Where do you see that?  You can only repair your own pitch mark if it is on the putting green, or after you play your next stroke (assuming that it is no longer on your line of play at that point).  If your ball and the pitch mark are both off the green, then you may not repair it before you play.  You aren't even allowed to repair the pitch mark from an embedded ball before dropping.

[Rulesman]

Any player can repair any pitch/ball mark which is on the green at any time.

16-1d Repair of Hole Plugs, Ball Marks and Other Damage

The player may repair an old hole plug or damage to the putting green caused by the impact of a ball, whether or not the player’s ball lies on the putting green.

A player may only repair a pitchmark which is not on the green if it is created after his ball comes to rest and it interferes with his lie.

13-2/8 Player's Lie or Line of Play Affected by Pitch-Mark Made by Partner's, Opponent's or Fellow-Competitor's Ball

Q. A player's lie or line of play through the green is affected by a pitch-mark made by his partner's, his opponent's or a fellow-competitor's ball. Is the player entitled to relief?

A. If the pitch-mark was there before the player's ball came to rest, he is not entitled to relief without penalty. If the pitch-mark was created after the player's ball came to rest, in equity (Rule 1-4), he may repair the pitch-mark.

A player is entitled to the lie which his stroke gave him.

[jross999]

Puzzling ruling.  In some cases a player is entitled to have his original line of putt restored if there was damage to the putting green after his ball came to rest.   (See Decision 16-1a/13)  This is based on equitable principles (see Rule 1-4).  The theory is that the player is entitled to his original line of putt (or in other cases lie) if some intervening event occurs that changes the lie or the line of putt.   I'ts not clear in Kuchar's case exactly when the damage (from a player's putter, apparently) occurred.   If it did not occur after his ball had come to rest on the green, I'm not sure he should have been entitled to relief.  The rules official reportedly indicated to Kuchar that such relief is not normally available, but that this was an unusual situation.  I'm looking into this.  (I write about rules.)

[Beachcomber]

Originally Posted by Big C

Thank you for posting this, but my understanding is that this exception only applies when the green is accidentally damaged by a member of the player's group. I don't believe Gary Woodland caused the damage in question. If it is an unknown prior group, don't you have to play the course as you find it?

I played a course here in Socal a few years back (Hidden Valley), and some moron was riding their horse along side a trail that was near one of the holes.  And in doing so, they detoured off the trail - and the horse trotted across the green.  The end result was 3" deep hoof prints in the green... When we reached the green, and saw the damage, we were pretty pissed as it did a number on the playability of the green. I did my best, as did the rest of our foursome, to repair the hoof marks that went through our putting lines...  But the result was irreperable damage in many areas - at least with the tools we were using (typical tee or divot repair tool).

So, my question... Are we saying that our foursome was in breach of the rules by repairing the hoof prints, as we were repairing an irregularity on the putting surface?

For those that our curious... Shortly after finishing the hole, we called the Proshop, and they sent out a maintenance team to repair the green... But we had already played the hole before it was fixed.

[460CompMark]

Originally Posted by saevel25

Honestly i hate the rule were you can't fix spike marks. I always thought it was stupid that you could fix ball marks, which a BALL (and outside object) caused, yet you can't fix a spike mark which a SHOE (outside object) caused.

agreed

[bplewis24]

Agree as well, and I'm curious to know the rationale behind the rule (not allowing fixing of spike marks).  It seems inequitable.

[460CompMark]

they are not really noticeable unless the greens are soft and bent, or metal spikes are still allowed.  i like metal spikes, but i think it's time to outlaw them.  they just tear up the greens.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by Big C

Not to mention, Kuchar completely collapsed after the favorable ruling - striking a terrible putt from the fringe and promptly triple bogeying the next hole.

Kuchar seems like one of the better guys on tour. I think he knew he had "gotten away" with one here and it showed in his play afterward. My guess is that if he had to do it over again, he wouldn't have called the official at all.

You might be right...just after the favorable ruling, you could hear Kuchar poking fun at Woodland saying something to the effect of who would have believed Gary Woodland was correct about a ruling.  He seemed to imply that it was Woodland's idea to call in the official.

Originally Posted by Beachcomber

I played a course here in Socal a few years back (Hidden Valley), and some moron was riding their horse along side a trail that was near one of the holes.  And in doing so, they detoured off the trail - and the horse trotted across the green.  The end result was 3" deep hoof prints in the green... When we reached the green, and saw the damage, we were pretty pissed as it did a number on the playability of the green.  I did my best, as did the rest of our foursome, to repair the hoof marks that went through our putting lines...  But the result was irreperable damage in many areas - at least with the tools we were using (typical tee or divot repair tool).

So, my question... Are we saying that our foursome was in breach of the rules by repairing the hoof prints, as we were repairing an irregularity on the putting surface?

For those that our curious... Shortly after finishing the hole, we called the Proshop, and they sent out a maintenance team to repair the green... But we had already played the hole before it was fixed.

If your balls were already on the green, then I think the answer is that you were allowed to fix the damage because it occurred after your ball came to rest.  If the damage happened before, then you have a Kuchar type situation of which there seems to be some disagreement on how it should be ruled.

In equity, if the damage is going to be repaired for the rest of the field behind you, I don't understand why it would not be fair to repair it for you also.

[Big C]

Originally Posted by bplewis24

Agree as well, and I'm curious to know the rationale behind the rule (not allowing fixing of spike marks).  It seems inequitable.

Brandon, from the USGA website, their rationale is as follows

Q. What is the USGA position on spikemarks?

A. The Rules of Golf are based on two fundamental principles: (1) play the ball as it lies and (2) play the course as you find it. Permitting the repair of spike marks on a player`s line of play or putt would be contrary to these fundamental principles. Rule 16-1c permits the repair of old hole plugs and ball marks but does not permit the repair of spike damage or other irregularities of surface on the putting green if they are on a player`s line of play or putt or might assist him in his subsequent play of the hole. The distinction lies in the fact that old hole plugs and ball marks are easily identifiable as such, whereas it is impossible to differentiate between spike damage and other irregularities of surface on the putting green. Permitting the repair of spike marks would also inevitably lead to a slower place of play. Please note that proper etiquette recommends that damage to the putting green caused by golf shoe spikes be repaired on completion of the hole by all players, just as a player should fill up and smooth over all holes and footprints made by him before leaving a bunker. We feel that improved education and players` consideration for others rather than a change in the Rules of Golf is the proper solution to the problem.

Personally, I'm not sure the pace of play argument holds water, especially since many of the courses I have played encourage people to "fix yours and one more" whenever possible.

[460CompMark]

This goes along the same lines as hitting your fairway shots out of old divots caused by groups in front of you.  It ridiculous that the guy in front of you had a perfectly nice lie, but now you are hitting out of his divot that he couldn't repair.  That is not treating each player fairly.  Doesn't make sense to me, but rules are rules.

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by Big C

Personally, I'm not sure the pace of play argument holds water, especially since many of the courses I have played encourage people to "fix yours and one more" whenever possible.

I don't think the "impossible to differentiate between spike marks and other irregularities" holds water either.  After hearing the rationale, I'm a bit more convinced that the spike mark rule should be changed.  An organic or natural irregularity is one thing, but damage from an external force (especially a competing golfer) walking along the green should be repairable.  Otherwise, it is inequitable.

[Asheville]

Originally Posted by 460CompMark

This goes along the same lines as hitting your fairway shots out of old divots caused by groups in front of you.  It ridiculous that the guy in front of you had a perfectly nice lie, but now you are hitting out of his divot that he couldn't repair.  That is not treating each player fairly.  Doesn't make sense to me, but rules are rules.

Here's the deal I'll offer you. You may move your ball out of the "bad luck" divot hole. In exchange, each time you hit your golf ball into the woods and it hits a tree and takes a "good luck" rebound out of the woods, you have to put it back in the woods.