A question on wording.

[ColinL]

But what you saw as unfair to you because you believed your ball had been spirited away by an outside agency is fair to everyone else because there was no certainty that that's what happened.  How often have we all lost a ball that we were sure should be in plain view in the middle of the fairway, and how often have we all come across a stray ball in plain view and wondered how on earth anyone could lose a ball that was so obvious?   In your situation when you didn't see where the ball ended up I'd have no hesitation in agreeing it was a lost ball and preventing you from getting an unfair advantage over the rest of the competitors.

Greatest good of the greatest number?

[Fourputt]

Just to throw in a comment about how reliable believing you saw your ball at rest after your shot is as evidence that an OA must have moved it while you were out of sight.  How often have you seen a "ball" from a distance (and not necessarily that great a distance) only to find  when you get closer that it wasn't  a ball after all?

If I saw the ball roll to a stop in the middle of a flat green fairway, and when I arrived at the spot, it was no longer there, then it isn't lost, it was taken by something or someone.  I don't dispute that it would take very a very particular case to not apply the penalty.  If the ball disappears from view before it stops rolling, then I accept the penalty as a valid argument.

That happened to me last Wednesday on my first round of the year.  On my tee shot on the 3rd hole, the ball is rolling on the left edge of the fairway and starting to curl back to the right.  Grass hasn't started to grow yet, so there is no rough to speak of.  The ball went into a little dip in the fairway and out of sight after already rolling for 20 or 30 yards.  We never found the ball, even after traversing the area for 5 minutes.  There were no people anywhere around, and we saw no animals of any kind.  It was one of those mysteries of the game that makes it both frustrating and memorable.  I returned to the tee and played another ball (almost empty course allowed that).

Yesterday, I did have my ball taken by an outside agency after it was seen to be at rest, to wit, a golden retriever that lives in one of the neighboring homes.  He did give it back though, without any damage.

[Perfect Slicer]

One of the par 5's on my home course plays over a hill to the fairway. You can see the start of the fairway at the crest of the hill from the tee box, but that's it. Its all downhill to the green from there. I hit an abnormally straight drive down the center of the fairway. I play alone a lot, and walk when I can, so by the time I packed up and walked up the hill it had been a few minutes. Came over the top, and there was a guy in a cart picking up my ball. He was playing the other 9 on an adjacent hole, saw my ball, and thought he had a freebie. He said he didn't think anyone was playing that side of the course yet. I would have been pretty disappointed if I came over the hill 2 minutes later and couldn't find my ball.

I had a ball picked up by a course Marshall one time. Hit it into the edge of some trees. Came to the ball and the Marshall was poking through the woods picking up balls. He had mine in his hand.

I never pick up balls on the course, even in the rough. You never know.

[turtleback]

I never pick up balls on the course, even in the rough. You never know.

I am the same way.  Too much risk of pissing off the golf gods.

[Perfect Slicer]

I am the same way.  Too much risk of pissing off the golf gods.

I think I piss the gods off just by walking onto the course. I'm more afraid of guys who are bigger than me. Or have had too many beers. Or even little guys who have had too many beers. Or their wives.

I think I've said too much.

[Mr. Desmond]

That is not what equity is about. Equity is applied when a situation arises for which there is no rule or decision. Under the Rules, equity means that like situations shall be treated alike. But in this case it is covered by 18-1 and 27-1/2.5, so equity does not come into it.

As Tufts says "The approach is not whether “this particular situation is unfair to me,” but rather whether “others in a similar situation and I in mine are treated alike under the Rules.”

1-4. Points Not Covered By Rules

If any point in dispute is not covered by the Rules, the decision should be made in accordance with equity.

18-1. By Outside Agency

If a ball at rest is moved by an outside agency, there is no penalty and the ball must be replaced.

Note: It is a question of fact whether a ball has been moved by an outside agency. In order to apply this Rule, it must be known or virtually certain that anoutside agency has moved the ball. In the absence of such knowledge or certainty, the player must play the ball as it lies or, if the ball is not found, proceed under Rule 27-1.

If no outside agency is seen how can it be virtual certain that an outside agency moved the ball.

18-1/5 is a good example of when there is virtual certainty.

In the note, there is an " or " involved.

"Must be known or virtually certain..."

Ball resting on fairway, take eyes off ball to walk/ride ... when arriving upon that spot in fairway, ball is gone ...

Outside agency, whether, bird, plane, or Superman, is virtually certain.

Subject to conditions ... earth collapse, earthquake, tornado, mother nature, winds, etc.

[Phil McGleno]

In the note, there is an " or " involved. "Must be known or virtually certain..."

Known = 100% Virtually Certain = 99% Does not meet the threshold in my opinion. Virtually certain is a very high threshold.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond

In the note, there is an "or" involved.

"Must be known or virtually certain..."

Known = 100%

Virtually Certain = 99%

Does not meet the threshold in my opinion. Virtually certain is a very high threshold.

You are tougher than you need to be then.  If there is no other possibility, then what reason do you give the player for dumping on him?

[rehmwa]

Yesterday, I did have my ball taken by an outside agency after it was seen to be at rest, to wit, a golden retriever that lives in one of the neighboring homes.  He did give it back though, without any damage.

And then the retriever indicated he wanted you to 'lose' the ball again and again.  It's ever so much fun to play fetch....

Last year I hit on a simple Par 3, saw the ball flight, saw it land, saw it roll to a stop.  We drove up and during the drive, it slowly disappeared.  I am certain I was able to walk to within a yard of the spot.  thick grass, but no holes or ground hog tunnels or anything I could see, no animals, certainly no old used ball collectors around, etc etc etc.  It wasn't muddy or anything like that.

searched until the others completed the hole - never found it - (course was crowded, so no option really to go back and re-tee.  I hope to play it again, this time I'll just hit the green and save the trouble).  It's just weird - likely went to the same place that socks and pens disappear.....in this case, lost ball if I was playing 'officially'.

Despite my post - if playing with the OP - the OP was virtually certain it was taken.  Depending on the course, the people playing that day, the layout, etc, I have no issue with him being the best person to make that assessment (much better than forum jockeys guessing at it)  - the alternative is to insinuate he's lying just to push the debate.  Though good for the discussion, it's a bit backhanded.  He's been VERY gracious with those posts.  Glad to have him on the boards therefore, a slightly thick skin helps keep it moving.

We've all played on public course where we hit a clear winner over a hill, then top the hill and see some groups of "two games a season'ers" walking off and our ball nowhere in sight.  It's rough.

Now, if I played with someone that made it a 'habit' to claim stolen ball......then I'd laugh about it and not argue, but I'd know

[Phil McGleno]

You are tougher than you need to be then.  If there is no other possibility, then what reason do you give the player for dumping on him?

There are plenty of other possibilities including them being mistaken about having seen the golf ball where they thought they saw it. It may not have been a golf ball. I have walked up to leaves and bottle caps and all sorts of things thinking they were golf balls only to find that they were not and that was not from 250 yards away and 100 feet above the fairway. He did not see the ball flight and then see the ball land, bounce, and roll to a stop.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

You are tougher than you need to be then.  If there is no other possibility, then what reason do you give the player for dumping on him?

There are plenty of other possibilities including them being mistaken about having seen the golf ball where they thought they saw it. It may not have been a golf ball. I have walked up to leaves and bottle caps and all sorts of things thinking they were golf balls only to find that they were not and that was not from 250 yards away and 100 feet above the fairway.

He did not see the ball flight and then see the ball land, bounce, and roll to a stop.

And since he did not include any of those factors in his opening post, I take him at his word.  If this was a competition and I was making a real ruling, I'd have investigated it to gather as much information as possible before making an actual ruling.  In this case, all I'm saying is that if the ball is seen at rest in the fairway, and there are no other invalidating factors involved, then you can't say that it's a penalty just because you're grumpy.  If - I repeat IF - after investifgation virtual certainty is met, then no penalty from me as a rules official.

[Golfingdad]

He did not see the ball flight and then see the ball land, bounce, and roll to a stop.

That is correct, however, his wife did see it bounce and come to rest.

I hit fantastic drive that sent my ball a long way where it came to rest in the fairway about 20 feet from a bunker.

I was using a bright yellow ball that I could see resting in the fairway from above.

My wife watched the ball in flight and she says it bounced before coming to rest in the fairway.

I feel like @Fourputt 's ruling on this is the most reasonable.

[Phil McGleno]

And since he did not include any of those factors in his opening post, I take him at his word.  If this was a competition and I was making a real ruling, I'd have investigated it to gather as much information as possible before making an actual ruling.  In this case, all I'm saying is that if the ball is seen at rest in the fairway, and there are no other invalidating factors involved, then you can't say that it's a penalty just because you're grumpy.  If - I repeat IF - after investifgation virtual certainty is met, then no penalty from me as a rules official.

Grumpy, ha ha. Not here. Maybe you are projecting your own feelings on to others. He clarified the things later on and they are true. I say not reaching the level required to be virtually certain. My buddy agrees, but what does he know - he has only officiated at 28 major championships in the U.S. (he counts the U.S. Am as a major). He said he hates the phrase virtually certain and holds it to mean 99% like I said above. Not some 95% or whatever. Now does this matter?-No it is just some guy posting a round for his handicap. Maybe the guys wife saw a ball from another fairway and the person properly played his ball while the OP actually lost his ball. That could have happened. And if you still disagree-Good for you. Rules are not all 100% totally always black/white as much as we would like them to be.

[Asheville]

Here's where the referee goes to enlighten himself on virtual certainty (snipped from D26-1/1):

Unlike "knowledge," "virtual certainty" implies some small degree of doubt about the actual location of a ball that has not been found. However, "virtual certainty" also means that, although the ball has not been found, when all readily available information is considered, the conclusion that there is nowhere that the ball could be except in the water hazard would be justified.

In determining whether "virtual certainty" exists, some of the relevant factors in the area of the water hazard to be considered include topography, turf conditions, grass heights, visibility, weather conditions and the proximity of trees, bushes and abnormal ground conditions.

The same principles would apply for a ball that may have been moved by an outside agency (Rule 18-1 ) or a ball that has not been found and may be in an obstruction (Rule 24-3 ) or an abnormal ground condition (Rule 25-1c ).

[Fourputt]

Here's where the referee goes to enlighten himself on virtual certainty (snipped from D26-1/1):

Unlike "knowledge," "virtual certainty" implies some small degree of doubt about the actual location of a ball that has not been found. However, "virtual certainty" also means that, although the ball has not been found, when all readily available information is considered, the conclusion that there is nowhere that the ball could be except in the water hazard would be justified.

In determining whether "virtual certainty" exists, some of the relevant factors in the area of the water hazard to be considered include topography, turf conditions, grass heights, visibility, weather conditions and the proximity of trees, bushes and abnormal ground conditions.

The same principles would apply for a ball that may have been moved by an outside agency (Rule 18-1) or a ball that has not been found and may be in an obstruction (Rule 24-3) or an abnormal ground condition (Rule 25-1c).

Which supports my contention that if virtual certainty is met, then there is no penalty in this case.  If the facts instill some doubt, of if there are not enough facts available to ascertain virtual certainty, then of course any doubt would be resolved against the player.  This is true in any case requiring virtual certainty.  Each case is taken on its own merits, and any ruling rendered according to the facts of the case.  This is all I've ever said all along.  I'm not going to absolve the player of any responsibility solely because he says he saw the ball in the fairway.  I'm not that trusting.

This is one reason why I was always so careful to watch my ball after it came to rest when it lay in a place where I knew that other players often hit to from another hole.  I watch my ball roll almost to a rest near a tree, but it's in light rough so I don't actually see the last few feet of roll.  The ball is within about 15 yards of another fairway, with another group having just teed off on that hole.  One spot on my former home course can be described in exactly that way, and I've lost a ball or two there.  Never knew if it had been picked up or just turned invisible, but it was still stroke and distance.  A couple of times I had to yell at someone from the tee to leave my ball alone.  Once I actually watched him pick it up, look around, then put it in his pocket.  In something like the OP's case, if I had happened to on the cart path out of sight of the ball at that moment, I'd have been penalized, and correctly so, but it still would have seriously pissed me off too.

[Phil McGleno]

Here's where the referee goes to enlighten himself on virtual certainty (snipped from D26-1/1):

Unlike "knowledge," "virtual certainty" implies some small degree of doubt about the actual location of a ball that has not been found. However, "virtual certainty" also means that, although the ball has not been found, when all readily available information is considered, the conclusion that there is nowhere that the ball could be except in the water hazard would be justified.

In determining whether "virtual certainty" exists, some of the relevant factors in the area of the water hazard to be considered include topography, turf conditions, grass heights, visibility, weather conditions and the proximity of trees, bushes and abnormal ground conditions.

[COLOR=FF0000]The same principles would apply for a ball that may have been moved by an outside agency (Rule [/COLOR] [COLOR=FF0000]18-1[/COLOR] ) or a ball that has not been found and may be in an obstruction (Rule 24-3 ) or an abnormal ground condition (Rule 25-1c ).

We can all read. I disagree that virtual certainty has been met. It is very simple.

[luu5]

Club pros are not the end-all-be-all when it comes to the Rules.  In fact, some of them have embarrassingly bad knowledge.  Not saying that's the case with that guy, but just a warning to not always accept their answer just because they're the "head pro."

One (or three) examples of bad knowledge by head pro(s):