Trees Marked as Lateral Hazard - Playing from Them

[imsys0042]

We need a better description.  You're saying the hazard lines are on the opposite side of the fairway from the water?  Show us a google Earth image perhaps.

Not sure if I can dig one up that shows it. At least two holes have this pattern though. There is an area that has water in it to the right of the green. It is a small pond/brook with a drainage area and virtually no way to play the ball from there. This water and drainage is even with the green and extends back towards the tee for approx 20 yards. Past 20 yards there is nothing but brush grass where a ball may or may not be findable. It is usually cut back once or twice a year. It is also on the side of a huge hill. The hazard extends from the area of the water back to the tee for 220 yards, making the entire hill and brush grass area one single hazard. It is all along the right side of the hole. So my question would be, is this considered a legit hazard? I looked up the USGA definition based on reading this thread and tend to think no because the vast majority of the hazard doesn't contain water and it could not be considered where water would drain. I believe that they have marked it due to pace of play. It is not the only such area. It's my home course, which is a 142 - 145 slope depending on the nines you play on. And already peoples' handicaps travel rather well. A number of people feel the course plays harder than the rating, so the golf committee might do this to try and soften the course a little bit.

[David in FL]

That doesn't address the point of a guy just wanting to play by the proper Rules. These "resort course" rules are used far too frequently. If a committee was there they should remove the stakes, but for every day play what is the guy who just wants to play by the rules to do?

I absolutely agree that the BS resort course rules are used far too often. Hell, Living down here, I see it more than most people. But we tell the guy who's playing casually with his buddies the same thing that we tell the guy who doesn't want to play by the rules. Play however they like. I hate the resort marking, but I just don't see how it affects non-tournament play, other than to help speed up the slow pokes. Now, if the same courses would actually communicate and enforce appropriate pace of play standards, we'd really be better off!

[iacas]

He's paid his money so makes his choice.

Who? Someone playing?

There's more to competitive golf than "tournaments." For example, I'm coaching a Division III team now. The courses don't do anything special to "set up" for the matches. They just play it however it is. The coaches are the "committee."

If there's a stand of trees marked with a red hazard line, I'd like to know what to do with it if it's clearly not a water hazard. I don't think one of my player should be penalized by moving a stone out of the way of their ball, or an apple, or a branch, etc.

Re your comment about rating.

I had this from the USGA a few years ago.

When the authorized golf association rates a golf course to establish a USGA Course rating and Slope the rating is done as if the course was in mid-season playing conditions, and that the golf course was marked in accordance with the Rules of Golf.  If the course is using preferred lies or markings that are not in accordance with the Rules of Golf those would not be considered when performing the course rating.

Yes, that's what I said earlier.

But we tell the guy who's playing casually with his buddies the same thing that we tell the guy who doesn't want to play by the rules. Play however they like.

I hate the resort marking, but I just don't see how it affects non-tournament play, other than to help speed up the slow pokes. Now, if the same courses would actually communicate and enforce appropriate pace of play standards, we'd really be better off!

It can affect tournament play all the time. See the above. It can also affect a match I'm having against a buddy for $20. What is the correct thing to do if you want to move a stone right in front of your ball on the top of a hill in some trees, and he says no, you're in a hazard (that, again, is NOT a water hazard)?

And @David in FL , sometimes people like to play by the proper Rules even if they're not in a tournament.

[saevel25]

It can affect tournament play all the time. See the above. It can also affect a match I'm having against a buddy for $20. What is the correct thing to do if you want to move a stone right in front of your ball on the top of a hill in some trees, and he says no, you're in a hazard (that, again, is NOT a water hazard)?

And @David in FL, sometimes people like to play by the proper Rules even if they're not in a tournament.

I never thought of that conflict before.

Beavercreek has a par 5 that has a red stripe that is 3 inches on the cart path. So anything to the right of it, including the trees are a lateral hazard. I believe they did this to speed up play. Maybe there is a creek somewhere in the trees. I know one area of the course it doesn't look like a creek at all because of trees that shade it.

It also brings in a point that if your ball is on the cart path, but inside that red line you can not take a relief from that cart path. I bet a few people might just take relief and drop closer to the tree line with out even thinking they were in a hazard marked area.

I think these situations do bring in certain conflicts with what normally wouldn't be a lateral water hazard.

[David in FL]

Who? Someone playing? There's more to competitive golf than "tournaments." For example, I'm coaching a Division III team now. The courses don't do anything special to "set up" for the matches. They just play it however it is. The coaches are the "committee." If there's a stand of trees marked with a red hazard line, I'd like to know what to do with it if it's clearly not a water hazard. I don't think one of my player should be penalized by moving a stone out of the way of their ball, or an apple, or a branch, etc.

Then the committee can simply designate that particular area as TTG on the hard card, can they not? [quote name="iacas" url="/t/84014/trees-marked-as-lateral-hazard-playing-from-them/18#post_1189788"] It can also affect a match I'm having against a buddy for $20. What is the correct thing to do if you want to move a stone right in front of your ball on the top of a hill in some trees, and he says no, you're in a hazard (that, again, is NOT a water hazard)? [/quote] Same answer. Acting as your own committee, either modify specific areas as TTG in advance, or play the course as marked. I'd be very careful though. It would be easy to inadvertently redesignate an actual, correctly marked hazard as TTG if you tried to do it with some kind of blanket statement. I play plenty of courses with a mix of woods and genuine wetlands, that aren't necessarily easy to tell apart from casual observation.... [quote name="iacas" url="/t/84014/trees-marked-as-lateral-hazard-playing-from-them/18#post_1189788"] And @David in FL , sometimes people like to play by the proper Rules even if they're not in a tournament. [/quote] C'mon. You know me better than to direct that at me....

[iacas]

Then the committee can simply designate that particular area as TTG on the hard card, can they not?

Again, what committee? We the coaches don't get to get out on the course and mark everything up before the round starts. So one of my kids is in an area that is not a water hazard but it's marked as one: can he move a twig or a loose stone near his ball? Should he be restricted from taking a drop within two clublengths?

I'm inclined to say yes in both cases: the course is mismarked.

Same answer. Acting as your own committee, either modify specific areas as TTG in advance, or play the course as marked. I'd be very careful though. It would be easy to inadvertently redesignate an actual, correctly marked hazard as TTG if you tried to do it with some kind of blanket statement. I play plenty of courses with a mix of woods and genuine wetlands, that aren't necessarily easy to tell apart from casual observation....

That's not really an answer, David. I want to know how it should be played per the Rules of Golf, or as they've failed us, how 9 senior Rules Officials would vote (or something).

C'mon. You know me better than to direct that at me....

No, I don't. You said " Play however they like" when not competing in a tournament. Sometimes golfers are playing by the rules and not in a tournament.

[Rulesman]

Who? Someone playing?

There's more to competitive golf than "tournaments." For example, I'm coaching a Division III team now. The courses don't do anything special to "set up" for the matches. They just play it however it is. The coaches are the "committee."

If there's a stand of trees marked with a red hazard line, I'd like to know what to do with it if it's clearly not a water hazard. I don't think one of my player should be penalized by moving a stone out of the way of their ball, or an apple, or a branch, etc.

Yes, that's what I said earlier.

It can affect tournament play all the time. See the above. It can also affect a match I'm having against a buddy for $20. What is the correct thing to do if you want to move a stone right in front of your ball on the top of a hill in some trees, and he says no, you're in a hazard (that, again, is NOT a water hazard)?

And @David in FL, sometimes people like to play by the proper Rules even if they're not in a tournament.

Re the USGA. I was just supporting your comment with a quote from the USGA.

Re coaching, learning and 'competitive' not tournament golf, I would play by the Rules and markings given. Those learning will how to proceed properly in correctly marked situations without having to think 'Is this marked correctly? What should I do?'

In competitive games, again play by the markings (and Rules). Everyone involved then knows exactly where they stand.

[David in FL]

Again, what committee? We the coaches don't get to get out on the course and mark everything up before the round starts. So one of my kids is in an area that is not a water hazard but it's marked as one: can he move a twig or a loose stone near his ball? Should he be restricted from taking a drop within two clublengths?

You've said that you're the committee.  Under 33-2 it's your responsibility to accurately mark the course.  If you don't (or can't) I'd argue that you've deferred that responsibility to the committee in charge of the course.....the ones that marked the course in the first place.  If you're worried about the course being marked properly, you should find a way to get out there and look at it in advance.

Regardless, if one of your kids gets into that situation, I'd expect him to play a second ball under 3-3.  I can't believe that any coach would risk the consequences by not telling all his players to utilize 3-3 in any case he wasn't sure of.....let alone if he intended to ignore a well marked portion of the course because he thought it was incorrectly marked.

That's not really an answer, David. I want to know how it should be played per the Rules of Golf, or as they've failed us, how 9 senior Rules Officials would vote (or something).

Since it's not covered specifically by the Rules, I'd expect 1-4 to apply.  In equity, all competitors should play the same course.  The way to do that is to play it as it's marked.

[ColinL]

For example, I'm coaching a Division III team now. The courses don't do anything special to "set up" for the matches. They just play it however it is. The coaches are the "committee."

If there's a stand of trees marked with a red hazard line, I'd like to know what to do with it if it's clearly not a water hazard. I don't think one of my player should be penalized by moving a stone out of the way of their ball, or an apple, or a branch, etc..........

....... It can also affect a match I'm having against a buddy for $20. What is the correct thing to do if you want to move a stone right in front of your ball on the top of a hill in some trees, and he says no, you're in a hazard (that, again, is NOT a water hazard)?

For a both a free-standing match against your buddy for $20 or a beer  and for  your team matches,   it  makes sense e to pre-empt any disagreements and problems by playing a course as marked no matter if the marking is wrong.

In a stroke play competition, it is really important that everyone plays it as marked.  The alternative of having players making up their own minds is unworkable.

[saevel25]

In a stroke play competition, it is really important that everyone plays it as marked.  The alternative of having players making up their own minds is unworkable.

Even marked courses can be deceiving. I played in a highschool match. The white stakes on this one hole where covered over by bushes and branches that have not been trimmed back. My ball landed really close to OB. I played a provisional as well, but ended up having to play two provisional balls. So we decided I should play two balls in and discuss with the coaches afterwards.

I was able to hack the ball out. Then I hit a ball on the green and made the putt. My difference in score was an 8 with the provisional and a par with the ball not being OB. The coaches came back after the round and took a look at where we marked my ball with a tee. There was no way to see a straight line between the two stakes. So in the end they left the decision up to me.

In the end, if there is any doubt to the situation, play two balls and consult the committee afterwards.

In some instances you have to just make your best judgement on it.

[iacas]

Re coaching, learning and 'competitive' not tournament golf, I would play by the Rules and markings given. Those learning will how to proceed properly in correctly marked situations without having to think 'Is this marked correctly? What should I do?'

In competitive games, again play by the markings (and Rules). Everyone involved then knows exactly where they stand.

I don't know, and I'm not convinced. I'll probably talk to some rules people I know.

You've said that you're the committee.  Under 33-2 it's your responsibility to accurately mark the course.

It's not gonna happen. Sorry, but be practical about this: we show up an hour before the tee times and then they are off and playing. We're the committee as far as making rulings and adding up scorecards and stuff, but we have no opportunity to set the course up or provide markings, etc.

If you're worried about the course being marked properly, you should find a way to get out there and look at it in advance.

Again, that's not at all practical.

Regardless, if one of your kids gets into that situation, I'd expect him to play a second ball under 3-3. I can't believe that any coach would risk the consequences by not telling all his players to utilize 3-3 in any case he wasn't sure of.....let alone if he intended to ignore a well marked portion of the course because he thought it was incorrectly marked.

Of course I'll tell them to use 3-3. What you're not answering is what the actual ruling should be.

There are situations in the Rules of Golf where golfers are told to do what is right - to proceed the way the course SHOULD be marked - and ignore the markings (or missing markings) if they're incorrect (or missing).

Since it's not covered specifically by the Rules, I'd expect 1-4 to apply.  In equity, all competitors should play the same course.  The way to do that is to play it as it's marked.

I don't agree. Something that doesn't meet the definition of a water hazard should not be treated as a water hazard. Again, the RoG give instances where players are asked to treat something that isn't marked as a water hazard if it is one - why isn't the opposite true?

After all, one can definitively say "this area is not a water hazard" because "water hazard" has a very clear definition.

And… where are you, @Phil McGleno . You started this mess!

For a both a free-standing match against your buddy for $20 or a beer  and for  your team matches,   it  makes sense e to pre-empt any disagreements and problems by playing a course as marked no matter if the marking is wrong.

Again… the Rules of Golf already have Decisions on the books where players are told not to play the course as marked.

In a stroke play competition, it is really important that everyone plays it as marked.  The alternative of having players making up their own minds is unworkable.

Yet… 26/2 and 26/3 provide instances where players are expected to do what is RIGHT not just what is marked.

[rogolf]

Play the course as it is marked - right or wrong, or risk DQ.  Discuss with the Committee after the round.

[Big C]

The way I see it 26/2 and 26/3 ask the player not to take advantage of the course's incorrect markings. In other words, do the right thing (for lack of a better term) even when you could gain an advantage by not doing so. But I can't see a ruling body ever giving a player free license to disregard course markings to their own benefit, even if the course is set up poorly. It would open up a can of worms and give too much of an opportunity for angle shooting.

[Phil McGleno]

Talked to my rules buddy. After getting him to understand that sometimes-Like in small traveling leagues or high school events or somesuch-You just do not have control to mark the course as you see fit he said he would use 3-3 and then present the case for why you felt you could move the rock or stick or you could ground your club afterward. Then if the committee bought it cool otherwise you live by their decision. He said that courses should know when they are skirting the rules to speed up play and should have a prepared sheet for tournament play which outlines which areas actually ARE water hazards and which are not. Of course if the course has that the player does not need to do 3-3 because it will say something like-The trees right of #3 marked as a lateral WH are to be played as through the green.

[iacas]

Play the course as it is marked - right or wrong, or risk DQ.  Discuss with the Committee after the round.

Again, there are already instances where the Rules of Golf tell you not to play the course as marked.

But I can't see a ruling body ever giving a player free license to disregard course markings to their own benefit, even if the course is set up poorly.

It's not necessarily a benefit. After all, by playing woods or tall grass as through the green (i.e. "not a water hazard") you can lose your ball in it. You can encounter unplayable lies. You're giving up the advantages in both of dropping two clublengths from where it crossed the line of the hazard.

The only advantages are that you can move a loose impediment and ground your club.

Edit: Just saw @Phil McGleno 's post. I'll reach out to my rules friends too.

[Fourputt]

I don't see how any competition committee worthy of the name can condone a course marking which is specifically prohibited in the rules.

33-8/35

Local Rule Treating Rough as a Lateral Water Hazard

Q.The areas immediately adjacent to the fairways consist of large embedded boulders, thick desert brush and prickly cactus. A player whose ball comes to rest in such areas has no opportunity to play a stroke. Would it be proper to make a Local Rule under which such areas would be treated as lateral water hazards?

A.No. There are many courses where the areas adjacent to the fairways are of such a nature that a ball therein is almost always lost or unplayable. Thus, such a situation is not abnormal.

[iacas]

I don't see how any competition committee worthy of the name can condone a course marking which is specifically prohibited in the rules.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that one. Thanks. Gives even more weight to my idea that a player may be correct in playing it as through the green.

[saevel25]

I don't see how any competition committee worthy of the name can condone a course marking which is specifically prohibited in the rules.

Good find.  It sounds like more and more courses are just being very liberal with the use of the rules in what they define as a lateral hazard.