Don't pick up that ball until you know what you’re going to do with it.

[JonMA1]

6 hours ago, Fourputt said:

The confusion is not caused by the rules, but by the nearly unlimited possible situations that a player can get into on the golf course.  It would be impossible to detail every possible scenario, so there are going to be times when it takes some analysis to properly apply a rule.  Most of the confusing situations are caused by the player himself not knowing how to follow basic rules for play.  If the player would take the time to learn those rules and procedures that apply directly to play on the course, most of the real problems people see in the rules would go away.

Agreed. Far too often disagreement or confusion is a case of us not taking the time to really study the rules and the decisions - in my case anyway.

55 minutes ago, Asheville said:

The USGA has spoken. The player was in breach of R18-2 when they lifted the ball without the intent to proceed under R28.

Good call originally @Asheville.

[Rulesman]

23 hours ago, Rulesman said:

From whom? Certainly not the rule makers

I wish I hadn't said that.

I still cannot see why 18-2/12.5 (4) doesn't apply. That player had no more or less intent than the OP.

 

[Asheville]

3 hours ago, Rulesman said:

I wish I hadn't said that.

I still cannot see why 18-2/12.5 (4) doesn't apply. That player had no more or less intent than the OP.

 

There are those two Decisions in R28-2/27 & 28 which both reference the player's intent (or lack thereof.) 

[Moxley]

I don't think the ruling described above is confusing, but I think the reasoning might be. 

Most rules are there for a reason, I can't see what hypothetical advantage a player can gain from picking up his ball without a clear intent, as long as he is committed to an option in which it is legal. 

 

Edited May 8, 2018 by Moxley
typo

[Asheville]

7 hours ago, Moxley said:

I don't think the ruling described above is confusing, but I think the reasoning might be. 

Most rules are there for a reason, I can't see what hypothetical advantage a player can gain from picking up his ball without a clear intent, as long as he is committed to an option in which it is legal. 

 

 

The Rules generally don't like it when the player starts doing things and then decides what course of action they now prefer. Those two 18-2 Decisions and Decision 13-4/37.5 reflect that notion.

[JonMA1]

8 hours ago, Moxley said:

I don't think the ruling described above is confusing, but I think the reasoning might be. 

Most rules are there for a reason, I can't see what hypothetical advantage a player can gain from picking up his ball without a clear intent, as long as he is committed to an option in which it is legal. 

I initially agreed and thought it might be a slippery slope to assess penalties based on uncertainty, but I hadn't read the Decisions. Since there is precedent, the OP made a good call, IMO.

On a side note, it's a good lesson for a youth to learn. If I were to compete, I wouldn't mind officials being hard-assed about enforcing the rules, so long as they were consistent. I think a definite advantage can be had by being more familiar with the rules than my competitor.

@Asheville, was the player's opponent penalized two strokes for giving advice?

[Moxley]

I wasn't criticising @Asheville or his correct judgement, just trying to understand to the reason why the rules would be this way.

I suppose it restricts a player getting a bit slippery and using the ambiguity (e.g. around the initial exact placement of the ball) to their advantage.

[JonMA1]

27 minutes ago, Moxley said:

I suppose it restricts a player getting a bit slippery and using the ambiguity (e.g. around the initial exact placement of the ball) to their advantage.

You might be right.

This decision makes think about when the pros pick up and are about to drop. There always seems to be a great deal of discussion with an official as to where the player can drop. It makes me wonder if at any point the player had an incorrect intent - not something as far-fetched as the situation in the O.P., just an intent to drop it in an incorrect spot. I guess that's a bit off-topic though.

[Fourputt]

The key here is to always figure out what your options are and how you want to proceed before you touch your ball.  Even if you mark it first, it's not a get out of jail free card.  I usually stick a tee behind the ball, then I go through my options for what procedures may apply and where any potential drop areas will be.  Only after I've done that do I pick up the ball (or decide that my best option is to play it as it lies and pick up the tee), and this whole process should only take a minute or less.

Most times the relief or drop is obvious, but not always, and it's the off chance of a poorly situated relief area that can put one in jeopardy.

Edited May 8, 2018 by Fourputt

[Asheville]

12 hours ago, JonMA1 said:

I initially agreed and thought it might be a slippery slope to assess penalties based on uncertainty, but I hadn't read the Decisions. Since there is precedent, the OP made a good call, IMO.

On a side note, it's a good lesson for a youth to learn. If I were to compete, I wouldn't mind officials being hard-assed about enforcing the rules, so long as they were consistent. I think a definite advantage can be had by being more familiar with the rules than my competitor.

@Asheville, was the player's opponent penalized two strokes for giving advice?

Though information (either correct or incorrect) on the Rules is not advice, bewildered youth should have given his fellow-competitor a wedgie.

[Shorty]

12 hours ago, Moxley said:

I wasn't criticising @Asheville or his correct judgement, just trying to understand to the reason why the rules would be this way.

I suppose it restricts a player getting a bit slippery and using the ambiguity (e.g. around the initial exact placement of the ball) to their advantage.

It's more about the fact that playing the ball from where it lies might be the best (and only) option. Again - Kevin Na.

Edited May 9, 2018 by Shorty

[JonMA1]

2 hours ago, Asheville said:

Though information (either correct or incorrect) on the Rules is not advice, bewildered youth should have given his fellow-competitor a wedgie.

Lol. You’ve just dispelled any myth about rules officials being humor-challenged. I’m guessing rules-challenged hackers like myself will always supply you folks with an endless source of material.

[Asheville]

13 hours ago, JonMA1 said:

Lol. You’ve just dispelled any myth about rules officials being humor-challenged. I’m guessing rules-challenged hackers like myself will always supply you folks with an endless source of material.

We get some dandies, no doubt.

The post-round debriefing over a cocktail most often has us wondering how the average player can be expected to not only hit good golf shots, but comprehend the intracacies of the Rules.

However, we all hope the 2019 version of the Rules will be a win for everyone.