Legal to go for the green or not?

[bossfrog]

I'm hoping someone can settle a disagreement between me and my brother.  The question is whether or not it is legal to shoot straight for the green on the hole shown below.  It's a tee shot over water to a small fairway and then a sharp dogleg left to the green.  There is a  white boundary marker just to the left of the fairway at the water's edge.  Does that mean the tee shot cannot go to the outside of that marker?  Pardon my ignorance on this.

[Asheville]

We're a little short on information about the "boundary marker" of which you speak. Absent other information or local rules a lone white stake might not indicate anything.

That aside, all that matters is where the ball ends up. A ball hit from a teeing ground can pass over any number of hazards and course boundaries on the way to its final resting place. A ball that, in this case, ends up on the putting green is in play.

[jamo]

Your ball is allowed to be OB while it's in the air. It's where it is when it comes to rest that is the issue.

[bossfrog]

Thanks guys.  Looks like I'm going to be aiming left with my 6 iron from now on...

[SavvySwede]

Some golf courses do try to enact local rules such as "No fly zones" but it is total BS and nobody actually abides by them.

[MS256]

Some golf courses do try to enact local rules such as "No fly zones" but it is total BS and nobody actually abides by them.

Yeah we have a hole where the rule is supposed to be that you can't go at the green but some people think the rules don't apply to them.

First of all it's a dumb play no matter how good you are and second you are hitting right over another green. For any chance of driving the green you have to hit a huge slice to avoid the trees near the tee box and carry it 250 yards across the water. When the trees were smaller it was worth the risk (for some players) but now it's a very low percentage chance for anybody.

My wife and I were on the other green last year and a moron thinned a low liner under the trees and hit me right in the stomach. Then he jumped in his cart and took off without even playing the hole.

This is the way it's supposed to be played and the moron way.

[David in FL]

Yeah we have a hole where the rule is supposed to be that you can't go at the green but some people think the rules don't apply to them. First of all it's a dumb play no matter how good you are and second you are hitting right over another green. For any chance of driving the green you have to hit a huge slice to avoid the trees near the tee box and carry it 250 yards across the water. When the trees were smaller it was worth the risk (for some players) but now it's a very low percentage chance for anybody. My wife and I were on the other green last year and a moron thinned a low liner under the trees and hit me right in the stomach. Then he jumped in his cart and took off without even playing the hole. This is the way it's supposed to be played and the moron way. [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/content/type/61/id/108169/] [/URL]

Unfortunately, the "moron" is playing completely within the rules. The only answer is for the course to place something in the way such that it's impossible to take a line directly at the green.....

[turtleback]

Unfortunately, the "moron" is playing completely within the rules.

The only answer is for the course to place something in the way such that it's impossible to take a line directly at the green.....

Exactly, the morons here, and in @MS256's example are the course set-up people.  You do not get to make up rules because you are too lazy to put up a screen.

[hilmar2k]

Is that really a par 4 with a tee-to-green distance of 171 yards? Why would anyone not go at the green? Even if you miss the green, you are still chipping for your second shot into a par 4.

[MS256]

Unfortunately, the "moron" is playing completely within the rules.

The only answer is for the course to place something in the way such that it's impossible to take a line directly at the green.....

No. He's really not. "The rules" are whatever the owner of the course wants to make them. The USGA has no jurisdiction over what he wants to do with his property and they are certainly not going to assume his liability if somebody gets seriously hurt.

The trees do make it "impossible to take a line directly at the green". They just don't stop morons from trying to hit a 250 yard slice around them.

Exactly, the morons here, and in @MS256's example are the course set-up people.  You do not get to make up rules because you are too lazy to put up a screen.

The course was built long ago, there is no room for options, no money for a screen, and probably will be shut down soon anyway. Most of us were glad the course was there all these years and we were more than happy to play by the "course rule" on that hole.

If somebody didn't like the rule they didn't have to play there.

The guy that built the course was just a young guy that had a little bit of land, no experience whatsoever, and did the best he could with what he had to do it with. He didn't build Augusta but many people in this rural area (that probably wouldn't have ever been introduced to golf without it) enjoyed it for a long time.

Purists like yourselves would hate it but there are other courses for you.

[David in FL]

No. He's really not. "The rules" are whatever the owner of the course wants to make them. The USGA has no jurisdiction over what he wants to do with his property and they are certainly not going to assume his liability if somebody gets seriously hurt. The trees do make it "impossible to take a line directly at the green". They just don't stop morons from trying to hit a 250 yard slice around them. The course was built long ago, there is no room for options, no money for a screen, and probably will be shut down soon anyway. Most of us were glad the course was there all these years and we were more than happy to play by the "course rule" on that hole. If somebody didn't like the rule they didn't have to play there. The guy that built the course was just a young guy that had a little bit of land, no experience whatsoever, and did the best he could with what he had to do it with. He didn't build Augusta but many people in this rural area (that probably wouldn't have ever been introduced to golf without it) enjoyed it for a long time. Purists like yourselves would hate it but there are other courses for you.

All well and good, but this is a "rules of golf" sub-forum and the OP in particular asked a specific question about the rules of golf. The correct answer from a "rules of golf" perspective remains, he may take whatever line he chooses. All that matters is where the ball ends up.

[Missouri Swede]

Is that really a par 4 with a tee-to-green distance of 171 yards? Why would anyone not go at the green? Even if you miss the green, you are still chipping for your second shot into a par 4.

That was my thought looking at the OP image as well: this looks like a par 3 hole.

It looks like almost as long a tee shot to the fairway as to the green, and the forced carry distance looks identical. And 171 yards is easily a par 3 distance, even for me.

Edit:  Also, there aren't any safety issues in going directly for the green.

[ColinL]

With reference to the white marker, it cannot signify a boundary.  A boundary has to be a line, which can only be defined by at least two markers.

[turtleback]

The guy that built the course was just a young guy that had a little bit of land, no experience whatsoever, and did the best he could with what he had to do it with. He didn't build Augusta but many people in this rural area (that probably wouldn't have ever been introduced to golf without it) enjoyed it for a long time.

Purists like yourselves would hate it but there are other courses for you.

Somehow I think that in all of that long time the course was enjoyed he could have figured out how to block that shot if he wanted to.  Or maybe figured out that he should have made that a par 3 to start with, since there was no safety issue.  That people enjoyed the course does not justify ignoring the rules.

And if expecting courses to be designed with at least the hope of being played according to the rules is being a purist, then I gladly accept.

[MS256]

Somehow I think that in all of that long time the course was enjoyed he could have figured out how to block that shot if he wanted to.  Or maybe figured out that he should have made that a par 3 to start with, since there was no safety issue.  That people enjoyed the course does not justify ignoring the rules.

And if expecting courses to be designed with at least the hope of being played according to the rules is being a purist, then I gladly accept.

Well luckily you may never play a course where they have such a rule.

Making it a par 3 would be turning a fun hole that pretty much separates the good players from the rest of us into just another golf hole. It's much better as it is.

Nothing wrong with not liking the rule or not playing the course. I doubt if you (or anybody else used to playing "nicer courses") would like it anyway.

In this case it's such a low percentage shot that I doubt if a single person has ever thought or said "I'll never play there again because I couldn't go for the green on 18." They might not go back for other reasons like my pet peeve (the fairway grass being too long) but not for that reason.

All well and good, but this is a "rules of golf" sub-forum and the OP in particular asked a specific question about the rules of golf. The correct answer from a "rules of golf" perspective remains, he may take whatever line he chooses. All that matters is where the ball ends up.

I was never answering the OP's question (as it had already been answered) but responding to whether it's OK to ignore course rules put in for safety if you feel like it.

I suppose if you feel like ignoring it, then ignore it. If you feel like cooperating, then do that.

No big deal to me either way (until somebody hits me with a ball).

[WUTiger]

Most courses I've played have at least one bone-headed hole design - even those built by famous golfers.

[Lihu]

Is that really a par 4 with a tee-to-green distance of 171 yards? Why would anyone not go at the green? Even if you miss the green, you are still chipping for your second shot into a par 4.

I was thinking the same thing.

Most courses I've played have at least one bone-headed hole design - even those built by famous golfers.

At least that's what I'm thinking as I'm teeing up my 3rd ball.

[bossfrog]

Is that really a par 4 with a tee-to-green distance of 171 yards? Why would anyone not go at the green? Even if you miss the green, you are still chipping for your second shot into a par 4.

Yes, it is.  The aerial photo doesn't tell the tale.  The distance to the green may only be 171, but it's elevated roughly 20' higher than the tee box, increasing it's effective distance.  When you add the trees that block the approach from the tee (one of which is a 60' walnut tree) and the fact that the green is sloping away from the tee box, funneling toward the bunker, it becomes a "reachable" par 4.  To land the ball on the green, you would have to hit an insanely long and high shot with some serious backspin to get over the trees, or would have to accurately draw the ball around the trees to put it on the green.  Even then, unless you land it on the south edge, where the green flattens, you're probably looking at the ball rolling across the green and right into the sand.  Most professionals would struggle to stick the ball on the green and I don't believe any would do it consistently.  Even if you do, you're looking at a long birdie putt because the hole is usually somewhere on a plateau in the northwest quadrant.

To note, it actually used to be a par 3 hole back when the American Legion owned it.  But when the current owner had the USGA rate the course about 10 years ago, they determined that it would be completely appropriate to change par to 4 based on there being a very low likelihood of a scratch player reaching the green in regulation due to the factors I mentioned above.  They told him it could remain a high-difficulty par 3 or an easier par 4 with the recommendation being to change it to 4.  The owner is a -2 handicap and when it was a par 3, he told me he only was only able to make par about 30% of the time, so he changed it to a par 4 right there on the spot.

BTW, I never said anything about me and my high handicap going for the green, I simply said left of that marker, where the second fairway area is.

EDIT: I guess if I would have remembered about all this to begin with, my original question would have been moot