Ball over Green

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by iacas

Quote:

Originally Posted by luu5

Of course I would play as water hazard if so marked. But as turtleback wrote, USGA does not restrict lateral hazards to be only lateral.

They recommend that they be used that way, however. That green sounds like the 17th at Sawgrass, which is not marked as a lateral.

The USGA would lean towards or prefer marking it yellow, not red.

A lot depends on how penal it would be to have to return to the previous spot.  For the OP's scenario, 90 yards is not excessively penal.  If the required shot was 180+, then either a dropping zone or a lateral designation would be understandable.  Like you I feel that the use of the lateral is overused and abused, but there are legitimate reasons for it to be applied in certain specific situations which might not directly fit the definition.

[David in FL]

Originally Posted by MEfree

"Natural grass areas are considered lateral hazards." is a local rule printed on the score card at a course I play regularly.

Are the grass areas designated as environmentally sensitive areas?  Other than that, I just can't imagine such a rule, but again, courses do weird/inappropriate things with those red stakes.....

Originally Posted by MEfree

Another course that I play regularly does not have this rule and hosted a Golf Channel Amateur Tour event recently.  I was told by the cart guys that the round took 6.5 hours because guys were not hitting provisional balls when they should- it looks like only 2 guys broke 80 (a 78 winning the Championship flight with a penalty for slow play and a 73 winning the Palmer flight.

http://thegolfchannel.bluegolf.com/bluegolf/thegolfchannel13/event/thegolfchannel13628/recap.htm?r=5ee62666-d957-4949-80b3-0da6930430ee  and  http://thegolfchannel.bluegolf.com/bluegolf/thegolfchannel13/event/thegolfchannel13628/contest/1/leaderboard.htm

Sounds like the course, as set up was too difficult for the level of competition.  But, having played in a lot of AMTour events, I can tell you, it's not all that unusual for very few people (including the Championship Flight) to break 80.....

.......really nothing to do with course marking though.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by David in FL

Sounds like the course, as set up was too difficult for the level of competition.  But, having played in a lot of AMTour events, I can tell you, it's not all that unusual for very few people (including the Championship Flight) to break 80.....

.......really nothing to do with course marking though.

Nor is the pace of play unusual to the point where you can place much blame on the course markings.

MEfree's course is one of the worst I've heard as it relates to course markings, though. And league handicapping. :)

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by MEfree

"Natural grass areas are considered lateral hazards." is a local rule printed on the score card at a course I play regularly.  Another course that I play regularly does not have this rule and hosted a Golf Channel Amateur Tour event recently.  I was told by the cart guys that the round took 6.5 hours because guys were not hitting provisional balls when they should- it looks like only 2 guys broke 80 (a 78 winning the Championship flight with a penalty for slow play and a 73 winning the Palmer flight.

http://thegolfchannel.bluegolf.com/bluegolf/thegolfchannel13/event/thegolfchannel13628/recap.htm?r=5ee62666-d957-4949-80b3-0da6930430ee  and  http://thegolfchannel.bluegolf.com/bluegolf/thegolfchannel13/event/thegolfchannel13628/contest/1/leaderboard.htm

The fact that some egomaniacs won't hit provisionals when they should is not a factor that should be taken into account in making rules or marking courses, IMO.

[VOX]

The fact that some egomaniacs won't hit provisionals when they should is not a factor that should be taken into account in making rules or marking courses, IMO.

Agreed, but provisional would not have been an option in the scenario that started this thread (ball in water hazard over the green) unless there was a local rule specifically allowing it.

[turtleback]

Agreed, but provisional would not have been an option in the scenario that started this thread (ball in water hazard over the green) unless there was a local rule specifically allowing it.

Agreed, but I wasn't addressing the OP or their situation, I was addressing the post I quoted.

[phan52]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree

"Natural grass areas are considered lateral hazards." is a local rule printed on the score card at a course I play regularly.

Originally Posted by David in FL

Are the grass areas designated as environmentally sensitive areas?  Other than that, I just can't imagine such a rule, but again, courses do weird/inappropriate things with those red stakes.....

There is a very good, top-rated course in my area that does that in a few spots (Philadelphia Cricket Club, Militia Hill course). They are not water hazards but the local rules has them as lateral hazards. It makes sense, as they are lateral to the hole and you are not allowed to go in and try to hit the ball, even if you find it.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree

"Natural grass areas are considered lateral hazards." is a local rule printed on the score card at a course I play regularly.

Originally Posted by David in FL

Are the grass areas designated as environmentally sensitive areas?  Other than that, I just can't imagine such a rule, but again, courses do weird/inappropriate things with those red stakes.....

There is a very good, top-rated course in my area that does that in a few spots (Philadelphia Cricket Club, Militia Hill course). They are not water hazards but the local rules has them as lateral hazards. It makes sense, as they are lateral to the hole and you are not allowed to go in and try to hit the ball, even if you find it.

Except that under the rules they should be marked as environmentally sensitive out of bounds.  If they aren't water hazards then they can't properly be marked as such.

[phan52]

Except that under the rules they should be marked as environmentally sensitive out of bounds.  If they aren't water hazards then they can't properly be marked as such.

What can I tell you? They are marked as environmentally sensitive areas and they are marked as a lateral. They are certainly not OB, as they are right in the center of the property.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Except that under the rules they should be marked as environmentally sensitive out of bounds.  If they aren't water hazards then they can't properly be marked as such.

What can I tell you? They are marked as environmentally sensitive areas and they are marked as a lateral. They are certainly not OB, as they are right in the center of the property.

Then they are marked wrong.  What can I tell you?  The rules are quite specific about what is and isn't a lateral water hazard.  If an area isn't a water hazard, then it can't be marked as such and still be within the rules.  A course can do whatever it wants to do, but that doesn't mean that it's right.  They can call it a local rule, but it would never be recognized as such in a properly run competition.  When I worked as an RO for a CGA competition, we marked the course as required under the rules, regardless of what the course did on a day to day basis.  If the course had a policy of leaving the rakes in the bunkers, we took them out of the bunkers.  A competition played under the rules must be played under all of the rules.

What is done for day to day play and what is correct under the rules isn't necessarily the same thing, and if a course is marked and played as you indicate then any handicaps obtained at such a course are inflated and essentially incorrect.

[phan52]

Then they are marked wrong.  What can I tell you?  The rules are quite specific about what is and isn't a lateral water hazard.  If an area isn't a water hazard, then it can't be marked as such and still be within the rules.  A course can do whatever it wants to do, but that doesn't mean that it's right.  They can call it a local rule, but it would never be recognized as such in a properly run competition.  When I worked as an RO for a CGA competition, we marked the course as required under the rules, regardless of what the course did on a day to day basis.  If the course had a policy of leaving the rakes in the bunkers, we took them out of the bunkers.  A competition played under the rules must be played under all of the rules.

What is done for day to day play and what is correct under the rules isn't necessarily the same thing, and if a course is marked and played as you indicate then any handicaps obtained at such a course are inflated and essentially incorrect.

It is one of the top courses in the Philly area and has hosted numerous sanctioned GAP events, including qualifying rounds for the Philly amateur and has hosted the Women's Pennsylvania Open. Sorry, but that's just the facts.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Then they are marked wrong.  What can I tell you?  The rules are quite specific about what is and isn't a lateral water hazard.  If an area isn't a water hazard, then it can't be marked as such and still be within the rules.  A course can do whatever it wants to do, but that doesn't mean that it's right.  They can call it a local rule, but it would never be recognized as such in a properly run competition.  When I worked as an RO for a CGA competition, we marked the course as required under the rules, regardless of what the course did on a day to day basis.  If the course had a policy of leaving the rakes in the bunkers, we took them out of the bunkers.  A competition played under the rules must be played under all of the rules.

What is done for day to day play and what is correct under the rules isn't necessarily the same thing, and if a course is marked and played as you indicate then any handicaps obtained at such a course are inflated and essentially incorrect.

It is one of the top courses in the Philly area and has hosted numerous sanctioned GAP events, including qualifying rounds for the Philly amateur and has hosted the Women's Pennsylvania Open. Sorry, but that's just the facts.

Then I'm guessing that it was remarked for the competition, or your GAP runs very odd tournaments.  I can't conceive of a sanctioned tournament being run contrary to the rules.

[Rulesman]

Then I'm guessing that it was remarked for the competition, or your GAP runs very odd tournaments.  I can't conceive of a sanctioned tournament being run contrary to the rules.

I have looked at the website and seen the high level events they have hosted and agree that it it is most unlikely those events would be played on a wrongly marked course.

[turtleback]

Except that under the rules they should be marked as environmentally sensitive out of bounds.  If they aren't water hazards then they can't properly be marked as such.

It would not have to be an environmentally sensitive OB.  The Committee has the option of marking it as GUR, with the penal difference being very substantial.  Appendix I gives the committee 3 options, mark it as a water or lateral hazard, OB, or GUR, with the first option only available if the area actually meets the definition of a water hazard.

[MEfree]

Quote:

Originally Posted by phan52

There is a very good, top-rated course in my area that does that in a few spots (Philadelphia Cricket Club, Militia Hill course). They are not water hazards but the local rules has them as lateral hazards. It makes sense, as they are lateral to the hole and you are not allowed to go in and try to hit the ball, even if you find it.

Except that under the rules they should be marked as environmentally sensitive out of bounds.  If they aren't water hazards then they can't properly be marked as such.

What can I tell you? They are marked as environmentally sensitive areas and they are marked as a lateral. They are certainly not OB, as they are right in the center of the property.

Then they are marked wrong.  What can I tell you?  The rules are quite specific about what is and isn't a lateral water hazard.  If an area isn't a water hazard, then it can't be marked as such and still be within the rules.  A course can do whatever it wants to do, but that doesn't mean that it's right.  They can call it a local rule, but it would never be recognized as such in a properly run competition.  When I worked as an RO for a CGA competition, we marked the course as required under the rules, regardless of what the course did on a day to day basis.  If the course had a policy of leaving the rakes in the bunkers, we took them out of the bunkers.  A competition played under the rules must be played under all of the rules.

What is done for day to day play and what is correct under the rules isn't necessarily the same thing, and if a course is marked and played as you indicate then any handicaps obtained at such a course are inflated and essentially incorrect.

It is one of the top courses in the Philly area and has hosted numerous sanctioned GAP events, including qualifying rounds for the Philly amateur and has hosted the Women's Pennsylvania Open. Sorry, but that's just the facts.

Then I'm guessing that it was remarked for the competition, or your GAP runs very odd tournaments.  I can't conceive of a sanctioned tournament being run contrary to the rules.

I have looked at the website and seen the high level events they have hosted and agree that it it is most unlikely those events would be played on a wrongly marked course.

It would not have to be an environmentally sensitive OB.  The Committee has the option of marking it as GUR, with the penal difference being very substantial.  Appendix I gives the committee 3 options, mark it as a water or lateral hazard, OB, or GUR, with the first option only available if the area actually meets the definition of a water hazard.

[phan52]

Quote:

Originally Posted by phan52

There is a very good, top-rated course in my area that does that in a few spots (Philadelphia Cricket Club, Militia Hill course). They are not water hazards but the local rules has them as lateral hazards. It makes sense, as they are lateral to the hole and you are not allowed to go in and try to hit the ball, even if you find it.

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Except that under the rules they should be marked as environmentally sensitive out of bounds.  If they aren't water hazards then they can't properly be marked as such.

I ran into a guy from Cricket Club over the weekend who happens to be on their golf committee and I asked him about this circumstance. He said that the lateral environmentally sensitive areas are actually considered a water hazard because, if left alone, they would become wetland areas. Although you can usually find your ball and there is never any water in there unless there is an unusual amount of rain. Hell, I can say that about half of our fairways.