Re-dropping- Why 2 club lengths?

[MEfree]

How did the rules makers decide upon two club lengths for rule 20-2c(vi)? "20-2. Dropping and Re-Dropping c. When to Re-Drop A dropped ball must be re-dropped, without penalty, if it: (vi) rolls and comes to rest more than two club-lengths from where it first struck a part of the course; or" OTOH, 20-2c(v) requires a re-drop when you are taking free relief and it rolls back into the condition for which you were taking relief (even if it rolls less than 2 club lengths), but by having 20-2c(vi) read 2 club lengths (as opposed to 1), then it becomes possible for you to take penalty relief for an unplayable and have the ball roll back into the exact same spot without allowing for a free re-drop. Likewise, you could drop 2 club lengths from the edge of a lateral water hazard, have it roll almost 2 club lengths back towards the hazard and end up having to stand in the water to play the shot from your normal side of the ball. Are these possible outcomes really what the rules makers intended?

[iacas]

:sigh:

Short answer: yes.

Longer answer: Dropping for an unplayable lie does not guarantee relief. It's just one of many options.

The two situations (i.e. dropping off a cart path for "free" versus taking a penalty stroke to extricate yourself from a lie you are solely responsible for deeming is "unplayable") are not alike.

OT answer: Beyond that, I'll again note that you've refused to spend the $2 or so to read the Principles booklet, and are breaking the rule we set for you (and you alone, given your tenacity and "tricks" and, frankly, hard-headedness) in discussing the Rules of Golf.

To others, there's a long history here with @MEfree .

[jlbos83]

When you take a drop for an unplayable lie you are not guaranteed relief, you are only guaranteed the opportunity to drop the ball.  In plenty of cases there isn't "relief" anywhere near the ball's position.  That's why before you drop you need to consider which unplayable option is "best", or perhaps decide it isn't that unplayable after all.  Likewise, in the water hazard case, you have other options, you need to think before you decide which to choose.

In cases of abnormal ground conditions, obstructions, etc., you are guaranteed relief (once you decide to drop under those rules), in fact you are required to get complete relief, rather than getting to just choose a place you like better.

[DaveP043]

This website:

http://www.ruleshistory.com/play.html

has a lot of information about the evolution of the rules, but not much about the reasoning behind the changes.

As I read the rules, there is less "sympathy" for a drop under penalty.  Its important to realize that you always have the option of replaying your original shot, so that you're not forced to take a drop that could put you back into the hazard, or into the unplayable lie.  For the free relief situations, there's more "sympathy", the rule-makers want you to get full relief from a situation that's "unfair" enough to deserve relief.

I realize I'm going beyond what's actually in the rules, this is merely my interpretation of the intent of the rules.

[jlbos83]

Are these possible outcomes really what the rules makers intended?

The short answer, in my opinion, is yes.

[saevel25]

OTOH, 20-2c(v) requires a re-drop when you are taking free relief and it rolls back into the condition for which you were taking relief (even if it rolls less than 2 club lengths), but by having

20-2c(vi) read 2 club lengths (as opposed to 1), then it becomes possible for you to take penalty relief for an unplayable and have the ball roll back into the exact same spot without allowing for a free re-drop.

Likewise, you could drop 2 club lengths from the edge of a lateral water hazard, have it roll almost 2 club lengths back towards the hazard and end up having to stand in the water to play the shot from your normal side of the ball

20-c(v) doesn't matter if it is two-club lengths or not. Those type of drops are always "nearest point of relief" + 1 club length. You can have a situation, like casual water, where the nearest point of relief could be 10 yards away.

An unplayable lie is a completely different situation from getting relief under 20-2c(v). Unplayable lie you get 2 club lengths. You never get to re-drop for an unplayable lie. The ball is in play as soon as you drop it. Where it ends up is where it ends up. Heck, if you drop your ball from an unplayable lie and it rolls into a water hazard your ball is now in play and in a water hazard.

28/3

Ball Dropped Under Unplayable Ball Rule Comes to Rest in Original Position or Another Position at Which Ball Is Unplayable

Q.A player deemed his ball unplayable and, under Rule 28c, dropped his ball within two club-lengths of the spot where it lay. The ball came to rest in the original position or another position at which the ball was unplayable. What is the ruling?

A.The ball was in play when it was dropped - Rule 20-4. Thus, if the ball came to rest in the original position, the player must again invoke the unplayable ball Rule, incurring an additional penalty stroke, unless he decides to play the ball as it lies. The same applies if the ball came to rest in another position at which it was unplayable, assuming that the ball did not roll into a position covered by Rule 20-2c, in which case re-dropping without penalty would be required

Correct. The rules for hazards always state you can stand in the hazard to play a ball outside the hazard. Example, you can stand OB and play a ball that is not OB. If you can't play that ball, then you can take an unplayable lie from that spot. If not, then suck it up, take off the shoes and stand in the water ;)

Are these possible outcomes really what the rules makers intended?

Yes they are.

[Phil McGleno]

What is the twist this time? Yes it is clearly what they intended @MEfree . My evidence? The fact that they wrote it down that way. They are not idiots who cannot comprehend or write English.

[MEfree]

:sigh: Short answer: yes. Longer answer: Dropping for an unplayable lie does not guarantee relief. It's just one of many options. The two situations (i.e. dropping off a cart path for "free" versus taking a penalty stroke to extricate yourself from a lie you are solely responsible for deeming is "unplayable") are not alike. OT answer: Beyond that, I'll again note that you've refused to spend the $2 or so to read the Principles booklet, and are breaking the rule we set for you (and you alone, given your tenacity and "tricks" and, frankly, hard-headedness) in discussing the Rules of Golf. To others, there's a long history here with @MEfree .

Does the principles book explain how they settled on 2 club lengths or roll vs 1? [quote name="saevel25" url="/t/83236/re-dropping-why-2-club-lengths#post_1168780"] 20-c(v) doesn't matter if it is two-club lengths or not. Those type of drops are always "nearest point of relief" + 1 club length. You can have a situation, like casual water, where the nearest point of relief could be 10 yards away.  An unplayable lie is a completely different situation from getting relief under 20-2c(v). Unplayable lie you get 2 club lengths. You never get to re-drop for an unplayable lie . The ball is in play as soon as you drop it. Where it ends up is where it ends up. Heck, if you drop your ball from an unplayable lie and it rolls into a water hazard your ball is now in play and in a water hazard.  Correct. The rules for hazards always state you can stand in the hazard to play a ball outside the hazard. Example, you can stand OB and play a ball that is not OB. If you can't play that ball, then you can take an unplayable lie from that spot. If not, then suck it up, take off the shoes and stand in the water ;) Yes they are.  [/quote] My understanding is that 20-2 applies to all drops. Are you sure you never are required to re-drop if an unplayable lie drop rolls more than 2 club lengths or closer to the hole?

[Martyn W]

" Heck, if you drop your ball from an unplayable lie and it rolls into a water hazard your ball is now in play and in a water hazard. "

That is not correct; the provisions under 20-2 apply to any dropped ball. It is true that the player may drop in a hazard when invoking 28, but if the ball rolls into a hazard 20-2 applies.

[Golfingdad]

What is the twist this time?

Yes it is clearly what they intended @MEfree. My evidence? The fact that they wrote it down that way. They are not idiots who cannot comprehend or write English.

Exactly.

Why is the cup 4 1/4"?  Why is the goal the fewest strokes instead of the most?  Why are bases 90' apart?  Why is a football field 100 yards long?  Why is the basket 10' high?

Are we sure that the rules makers in each of these sports intended for this to happen?  We should definitely analyze this more because I'm not so sure they did.

[Hatchman]

Even more simplified thought process: relief or penalty from golfers action; and, relief from course without penalty. Do not reward the caused penalty action of participant, in any sport.

[MEfree]

This website: [URL=http://www.ruleshistory.com/play.html]http://www.ruleshistory.com/play.html[/URL] has a lot of information about the evolution of the rules, but not much about the reasoning behind the changes. As I read the rules, there is less "sympathy" for a drop under penalty.  Its important to realize that you always have the option of replaying your original shot, so that you're not forced to take a drop that could put you back into the hazard, or into the unplayable lie.  For the free relief situations, there's more "sympathy", the rule-makers want you to get full relief from a situation that's "unfair" enough to deserve relief. I realize I'm going beyond what's actually in the rules, this is merely my interpretation of the intent of the rules.

I think you are correct. Given that it slows down play to go back to the original spot, I wonder why there isn't more sympathy for those that are taking a penalty drop? To be clear, I am not suggesting that they waive the penalty, but once you accept the penalty, why not offer some actual relief?

[iacas]

Does the principles book explain how they settled on 2 club lengths or roll vs 1?

Directly? No. But it lays out the foundations for ALL of the Rules of Golf, and as I said, is a rule we've made for you. We're going to again begin enforcing that rule.

Are we sure that the rules makers in each of these sports intended for this to happen?  We should definitely analyze this more because I'm not so sure they did.

Yup. I agree with @Phil McGleno .

And since that's the question you're asking, what's to stop me from considering this question answered and closing the thread?

Given that it slows down play to go back to the original spot, I wonder why there isn't more sympathy for those that are taking a penalty drop?

Where in the Principles booklet that you have refused to read despite people having offered to send it to you for free does it say that pace of play matters more than adhering to those basic principles?

[saevel25]

My understanding is that 20-2 applies to all drops. Are you sure you never are required to re-drop if an unplayable lie drop rolls more than 2 club lengths?

You are correct, it does apply to all drops. I was mistaken on that.

The player may deem his ball unplayable at any place on the course, except when the ball is in a water hazard. The player is the sole judge as to whether his ball is unplayable.....

c. Drop a ball within two club-lengths of the spot where the ball lay, but not nearer the hole.

The rule is you have to drop the ball with in two club-lengths of a spot. It does not say it has to end up with in two club-lengths from that hazard.

See this decision

20-2c/1

Dropped Ball Rolling Out of Prescribed Dropping Area

Q.A player taking relief under the Rules sometimes appears to obtain more relief than he is entitled to because the relevant Rule allows him some latitude within which to drop and the dropped ball then rolls some distance from the place where it was dropped. When a Rule prescribes an area within which a ball must be dropped, e.g., within one or two club-lengths of a particular point, should it be re-dropped if it rolls outside the area so prescribed?

A.No, not necessarily. Provided the ball has been correctly dropped (Rule 20-2a) and does not roll into any of the positions listed in Rule 20-2c, it is in play and must not be re-dropped. In particular, under Rule 20-2c(vi), the ball may roll up to two club-lengths from the point where it first struck a part of the course when dropped, and this may result in its coming to rest an appreciable distance farther from the condition from which relief is being taken. For example:

(a) a ball dropped within two club-lengths of the margin of a lateral water hazard may come to rest almost four club-lengths from the hazard margin without the player being required to re-drop it under Rule 20-2c; and

(b) a ball dropped away from an immovable obstruction within one club-length of the nearest point of relief may come to rest almost three club-lengths from the nearest point of relief without the player being required to re-drop it under Rule 20-2c.

Yes the ball can be dropped and roll back into the unplayable lie. Unplayable lie isn't covered under 20-2c(v).

I think you are correct. Given that it slows down play to go back to the original spot, I wonder why there isn't more sympathy for those that are taking a penalty drop? To be clear, I am not suggesting that they waive the penalty, but once you accept the penalty, why not offer some actual relief?

That is off-topic. Your topic is on the re-dropping rules, not pace of play.

There is relief. In some situations you might end up in the scenario where the ball could end up back in an unplayable lie. This situation is highly unlikely. Lets just say i've never had or seen this happen before.

[Phil McGleno]

@MEfree , you know the part in the Newsroom tv show where Will character says 'if Democrats are so ****ing smart why do they lose so goddamn always?' You are the Democrat in this scenario. You have gone on before about how smart you are and yet you always ****ing lose. And worse yet you annoy the shit out of people in the process. Of course that is what they meant. Why? ****ing go ask them.

[jlbos83]

I believe the pace-of-play argument in cases like this is a red herring.  If you are keeping up with the group in front an occasional trip back by one player isn't going to gum up the works.

[MEfree]

Directly? No. But it lays out the foundations for ALL of the Rules of Golf, and as I said, is a rule we've made for you. We're going to again begin enforcing that rule. Yup. I agree with @Phil McGleno . And since that's the question you're asking, what's to stop me from considering this question answered and closing the thread? Where in the Principles booklet that you have refused to read despite people having offered to send it to you for free does it say that pace of play matters more than adhering to those basic principles?

I may not have read the principles book, but I have read lots of posts here that talk about it and think I have a pretty good idea what the book is about. It seems to me, that many rules of golf actually violate the basic principle of "play the ball as it lies" in the interest of "playability" While this is probably a good thing, it seems that almost every rule tweak (and they do get changed from time to time) can be justified. I'd be happy to read a free copy. Please PM for the address to send it. Thx

[Phil McGleno]

I believe the pace-of-play argument in cases like this is a red herring.  If you are keeping up with the group in front an occasional trip back by one player isn't going to gum up the works.

It is a weak sauce version of the twist @MEfree loves to throw in to these rules discussions. He starts them and gets people to answer and then introduces a twist later about what he THINKS it SHOULD be. This is just the latest and weakest version of that. He has a long history here as they said above. Welcome to the site @jlbos83 . I do not play much in the Rules forum but it is one of the best out there that I can see, and the whole site too.