Dechambeau Drop on 18

[Martyn W]

I posted this on another forum immediately after it happened:

" Did anyone see the Dechambeau drop just now on 18? I'm pretty sure the drop from the TIO which came to rest on a cartpath was more than 2CL from where it struck a part of the course. The RO deemed the drop correct and gave relief from the cartpath instead of re-dropping. I could be wrong.... "

It appears I wasn't seeing things -   http://golfweek.com/.../masters-2016-bryson-dechambeau.../

 

[David in FL]

I saw it and immediately thought the exact same thing.

[natureboy]

I think Brandt Snedeker made a similar comment on Twitter.

[newtogolf]

I'm not a rules expert but even I was confused as to why they crossed the cart path.  I thought there was some other rule at play I didn't know.  

[Fourputt]

I was seeing the same as the rest of you.  It certainly seemed as though the ball ended up farther than 2 clublengths as it lay on the cart path, but I'll take the actions of the RO on site.  He seemed to know what he was doing.  Then the next drop for relief from the cart path seemed okay.

[saevel25]

 

Quote

However, because DeChambeau was acting under the guidance of the referee, he would be absolved from any penalty for the ball ending up in the wrong place.

Yea, it basically falls on the referee to catch it not Bryson. This is really a non-issue if there is a discussion on further penalties. 

 

[Rulesman]

 

[The Club Nut]

That sentiment was the same thing out of my mouth when it happened. I was like woa woa woa. That's more than 2 clublengths.  He should have been hitting that shot from the other side of the path in line with those trees and had a way worse shot than he ended up with. 

[pumaAttack]

On 4/9/2016 at 11:03 AM, saevel25 said:

 

Yea, it basically falls on the referee to catch it not Bryson. This is really a non-issue if there is a discussion on further penalties. 

 

That is exactly why players are so quick to call the rules official over whenever there is a questionable ruling.

[Howling Coyote]

On April 9, 2016 at 9:14 AM, newtogolf said:

I'm not a rules expert but even I was confused as to why they crossed the cart path.  I thought there was some other rule at play I didn't know.  

What I saw -- they first did a drop on the correct side of the cart path, but then the ball rolled onto the cart path.  DeChambeau repeated his drop and the same thing happened.  So then the issue became relief from the cart path itself and that was why they went to the other side of the cart path.  Again from the other side the ball rolled onto the cart path (because of the heavy slope).  That is when they went more than 2 CL.

[Golfingdad]

On 4/9/2016 at 0:22 PM, Rulesman said:

 

I'm confused as to why the first and second drops on this video occur at different places.  The first one is between the two tees, whereas the second drop occurred between the first tee and the path.  Whoops, never mind ...

Quote

TIO intervention situations don’t occur often in amateur events, so DeChambeau actually dropped the ball inside the one club length “alley-way” the first time.  DeChambeau was required to correct this mistake under Rule 20-6 and the referee correctly told him to pick up the ball and drop it again outside the “alley-way”.  From this point on, the only way the ruling makes sense is if that ball came to rest within two club lengths of where it first struck the course on the drop. If that is the case, the referee did an amazing job in an incredibly complex situation.

For the record, it's mathematically impossible for him to cross this path with any kind of drop because it's just too wide.  According to google maps, the path is about 7 yards wide and  2 drivers is only 2.5 yards.  Your NPR would never cross to the other side before the ball rolled more than 2 clublengths.  Regardless, as others have said, its a non issue because he let the rules official handle it.

---

Oh, wait a second.  I get it!  Based on the paragraph I just quoted, his NPR for the TIO was left of that second tee, which means that even if he dropped immediately up next to it, his stance is going to be impeded by the cart path, which means he gets relief from that.  But staying on the "correct" side of the cart path would then put him back within the "alley-way" of the TIO relief that he is required to steer clear of, right?  So they either sit there and go in circles all day back and forth and back and forth, or he HAS to drop on the opposite side of the cart path.  What do the ACTUAL rules experts (i.e., not me) think of that?

 

[saevel25]

Let's say it kept rolling past the maximum allowable two-club lengths. So then he gets to place it. Now he's standing on the path. If he tries to take relief from the path and it puts him in the same area he was originally getting relief from the obstruction then does he go through the whole process again? 

 

[Martyn W]

3 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Let's say it kept rolling past the maximum allowable two-club lengths. So then he gets to place it. Now he's standing on the path. If he tries to take relief from the path and it puts him in the same area he was originally getting relief from the obstruction then does he go through the whole process again? 

 

The situation would be analogous to 1-4/8

[dkolo]

On 4/9/2016 at 8:44 AM, Martyn W said:

I posted this on another forum immediately after it happened:

" Did anyone see the Dechambeau drop just now on 18? I'm pretty sure the drop from the TIO which came to rest on a cartpath was more than 2CL from where it struck a part of the course. The RO deemed the drop correct and gave relief from the cartpath instead of re-dropping. I could be wrong.... "

It appears I wasn't seeing things -   http://golfweek.com/.../masters-2016-bryson-dechambeau.../

 

I just texted this to my girlfriend who teased me for being wrong when DeChambeau didn't proceed under the rules the way I said he had to when we were watching together. Being right vis a vis your significant other is the next best feeling to winning The Masters, I imagine.

[Rulesman]

On 4/11/2016 at 10:53 PM, Martyn W said:

The situation would be analogous to 1-4/8

Exactly.

[MacDutch]

I understand the equity 1-4/8, but first things first:

As the first drop did not come to rest within the proper distance, he should have dropped again within the two tees we see on de vid. But the rules official points to a place outside the two tees, where Dechambeau drops again. Why is this? I think if the drop would have been within the tees the second time, he should have placed it (at the place where the ball touched the ground first) and there would be no relief from the carpath.

It seems as if the first drop did not come to rest at all, as opposed to the second drop, where they waited until the ball came to rest. Why they didn't they wait on the first drop to come to rest?

Then the third drop. Bryson just sticks two tees in the ground, no measuring at all. 

I wonder why this is all ok. What an I missing here?

Edited April 13, 2016 by MacDutch

[Martyn W]

2 hours ago, MacDutch said:

I understand the equity 1-4/8, but first things first:

As the first drop did not come to rest within the proper distance, he should have dropped again within the two tees we see on de vid. But the rules official points to a place outside the two tees, where Dechambeau drops again. Why is this? I think if the drop would have been within the tees the second time, he should have placed it (at the place where the ball touched the ground first) and there would be no relief from the carpath.

It seems as if the first drop did not come to rest at all, as opposed to the second drop, where they waited until the ball came to rest. Why they didn't they wait on the first drop to come to rest?

Then the third drop. Bryson just sticks two tees in the ground, no measuring at all. 

I wonder why this is all ok. What an I missing here?

What you are missing is the fact that the first drop did not count as a drop since it was not dropped correctly i.e. it did not first strike a part of the course within the prescribed area.

[Hardluckster]

Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but here is my understanding of what happened:

Rule dictates that the relief from the TIO must be at least one full club length from the concession stand (hence, the first tee closest to the stand).  The relief must be no more than one club length from that point (hence, the second tee).  The ball must be dropped between these two points (marked by the tees).

The first drop was disallowed because it was not within the area between the two tees.  It therefore never really happened.

The second drop (the first official drop) rolled down onto the road and stopped.  

From this point, I am unsure what happened and why.  It appears obvious to me that the ball rolled more than 2 club lengths and that the drop should have been repeated (likely with the same result as the first drop).  Bryson would then have been required to place the ball at the point it struck the ground on the second legal drop, likely meaning that the road/cart path would have been in his stance and would have allowed him to take further relief.  

This is not what happened, however.  While the result may well have ended up being very similar to what actually occurred, I think at this point that the rules official made an error.