Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
IGNORED

Ball comes to rest against cart path carved into hill


Note: This thread is 3376 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted

So at a course I played a while back, the right side of the fairway is bounded by a fairly steep grassy ridge, with the cart path running along it about halfway up the slope. The reason for this design is that the other side of the course has a lateral water hazard that would be unfairly affected by the presence of a cart path, and the peak of this ridge has a netting fence protecting golfers on the course from errant shots by the driving range adjacent to this hole (also defining out-of-bounds for this hole, so the hill and cart path are in-bounds). The cart path is thickly poured, and new enough that the outer edge of the cart path is above the ground level of the hill, with no retaining wall needed (not yet anyway). This was in July, in Texas under drought conditions, so the roughs were very thin yellow bermudagrass, given just enough water from the course sprinklers to not die completely.

Upon teeing off, my fellow-competitor's ball fades and runs up the hill, rolls along the cart path for a while, then off the outside edge of the path, coming to rest against the cart path. The cart path being an immovable obstruction, Rule 24-2 applies, allowing a drop within one clublength of the "nearest point of relief" and no nearer the hole. My fellow-competitor determines, and we agree, that the nearest point of relief is further up the hill by enough distance to clear the cart path (about a grip-length), and so he elects to drop about a clublength from the edge of the cartpath itself which is in accordance with the Rule. However, the hill is steep enough that the ball rolls right back down to the edge of the cartpath. Under Rule 20-2c, this calls for a re-drop, which occurs with exactly the same result, and again under 20-2c the ball must be placed at the point where it first hit the ground. However, when placed, the hill is still steep enough and the grass thin enough that the ball will not lie at rest in accordance with Rule 20-3d, even after replacement. So, under 20-3d(i), the ball must be placed at the nearest point where it will come to rest that is not nearer the hole.

Here is where we didn't know how to proceed. What we actually did, since by the time we got this far the next group was at the tee behind us, was to allow the fellow-competitor to place the ball at the nearest point we could find where the ball would come to rest in a playable position, not nearer the hole, and in a similar ground condition (in the rough, with the ball still above the level of his feet), and to play from that point with no penalty. We found such condition on the other side of the cart path, closer to the fairway, and play continued from there.

However, this seems to have been in error. Technically, the closest point where that ball could have come to rest in accordance with 20-3d is against the cart path where it originally lay before all this began. Neither Rule 20-3d(i) nor any decision on 20-3 stipulate that the point in question must be playable; just not nearer the hole. Decision 20-3d/2, which generally advises players to proceed under Rule 28 and allow alternate relief in exchange for a penalty stroke, seems the closest to our situation, only we wouldn't have to use 1-4 to justify proceeding under any option provided by Rule 28.

Since we'll play there again, what would be the correct/fair move by strict rules? Requiring a penalty stroke for relief from an immovable obstruction that would, in any less severe circumstance, be penalty free doesn't seem fair, but neither does allowing the player to move it anywhere without penalty just because it's impossible to move it according to 24-2.


Posted

The rule first requires that you take complete relief.  That still applies if you have to find a secondary spot where the ball will remain at rest.  There is no limit on how far that spot can be from the original dropping area, only that it must be the nearest such spot that is not closer to the hole and that it doesn't bring the lie, stance or swing back into interference with the condition from which relief is being taken.. 

  • Upvote 2

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

what many amateurs don't know is you have only one choice of what side of the cart path. You have only one choice of where the ball  will be played, not two or not one better than the other, there is only one. Nearest point of relief. 

 

Nearest point of relief is determined by using a likely club to be used, set your feet, ground the club, place a tee there. From that Tee you have one club length distance to take a drop, it can be six inches from the tee or 2 feet, needs to be inside club length.  If you have a cart path running parallel to the fairway and you are right handed, the left side of the fairway will be a closer point of relief than the right ( assuming the ball is directly in the middle of the cart path)

 

Think it over wisely, and quickly

 

Obviously no closer to the hole and your drop from a cart path or hazard can not return to the area that you are taking relief from. 


Posted (edited)
On 9/2/2016 at 11:27 PM, Liko81 said:

 

However, this seems to have been in error. Technically, the closest point where that ball could have come to rest in accordance with 20-3d is against the cart path where it originally lay before all this began. Neither Rule 20-3d(i) nor any decision on 20-3 stipulate that the point in question must be playable; just not nearer the hole. Decision 20-3d/2, which generally advises players to proceed under Rule 28 and allow alternate relief in exchange for a penalty stroke, seems the closest to our situation, only we wouldn't have to use 1-4 to justify proceeding under any option provided by Rule 28.

Since we'll play there again, what would be the correct/fair move by strict rules? Requiring a penalty stroke for relief from an immovable obstruction that would, in any less severe circumstance, be penalty free doesn't seem fair, but neither does allowing the player to move it anywhere without penalty just because it's impossible to move it according to 24-2.

You were correct up to this point. The place where it would stay at rest could be on either side of the cart path provided it was not nearer than any other point it would stay at rest.

Edited by Rulesman

Note: This thread is 3376 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • I'm not sure you're calculating the number of strokes you would need to give correctly. The way I figure it, a 6.9 index golfer playing from tees that are rated 70.8/126 would have a course handicap of 6. A 20-index golfer playing from tees that are rated 64/106 would have a course handicap of 11. Therefore, based on the example above, assuming this is the same golf course and these index & slope numbers are based on the different tees, you should only have to give 5 strokes (or one stroke on the five most difficult holes if match play) not 6. Regardless, I get your point...the average golfer has no understanding of how the system works and trying to explain it to people, who haven't bothered to read the documentation provided by either the USGA or the R&A, is hopeless. In any case, I think the WHS as it currently is, does the best job possible of leveling the playing field and I think most golfers (obviously, based on the back & forth on this thread, not all golfers) at least comprehend that.   
    • Day 115 12-5 Skills work tonight. Mostly just trying to be more aware of the shaft and where it's at. Hit foam golf balls. 
    • Day 25 (5 Dec 25) - total rain day, worked on tempo and distance control.  
    • Yes it's true in a large sample like a tournament a bunch of 20 handicaps shouldn't get 13 strokes more than you. One of them will have a day and win. But two on one, the 7 handicap is going to cover those 13 strokes the vast majority of the time. 20 handicaps are shit players. With super high variance and a very asymmetrical distribution of scores. Yes they shoot 85 every once in a while. But they shoot 110 way more often. A 7 handicap's equivalent is shooting 74 every once in a while but... 86 way more often?
    • Hi Jack.  Welcome to The Sand Trap forum.   We're glad you've joined.   There is plenty of information here.   Enjoy!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.