luu5

And this is CONGU/EGA related HC question, not USGA. Just to be clear.

Why do you think deceleration at the impact, due to hitting the ball, is a bad thing? Where do you think the momentum needed to get ball moving comes from if not from the change in clubhead's momentum?

Thx, just read about it on another forum.

But this may move you back to cart path. So better check carefully before picking up the ball.

Quote: Originally Posted by rogolf What are we - a bunch of jerks or gentlemen? Mark and lift the ball! But there has to be a "reasonable possiblity" of assisting or interfering. So the rule can not be abused and each case is unique. From decision 22/3: Quote: Rule 22 is intended to cover situations where there is a reasonable possibility that one ball might assist or interfere with another ball. If the Rule is being abused, as in this case, the Committee would be justified in penalising B for undue delay (Rule 6-7).

Perhaps it speaks more about your club?

True, what I mean is that there is no need to make things more complicated when in this type of situation. Just take unplayable and that's it. All done by the book.

This is true and it looks like OP did that, except we do not know if he added the penalty. No need for special rules.

Perhaps knowing the real reason would ensure the law suit ending up (quite) right? http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/26/us-malaysianairlines-boeing-lawsuit-idUSBREA2P0PP20140326

I did not suggest that he prys the ball out trying to find water. His ball was 4 inches below surface, so unplayable is most likely. If he then sees water in the hole, I would say it is casual water. I can see Ignorant's point in not giving free relief. But to say that water is not casual water would be odd, what water that then is?

If you hit a ball four inches below surface, most likely you would take unplayable, i.e. you lift the ball, find water in the hole, casual water. Or do you mean casual water has to always be visible without any action (except taking a stance)?

In decision 25/3 the player is also creating the condition but is allowed the relief. What about deeming ball unplayable, digging the ball up and then finding out the casual water, a'la decision 28/13? Maybe @fourputt is on his way back to/from the mountain?

25-2 is only available on "closely mown area", unless there is a local rule which expands it to "through the green". As you say the conditions were wet, if after digging up the ball there is water in the pitch mark, then he could use 25-1 to get a free relief from casual water.

The big problem with wrongly/badly written hard card is same as with wrongly/badly marked course. It is what the player goes with and plays, in that tournament. If it says you can pick your ball and carry it across the river, the player (if he read the HC) will do it. If the woods are marked as lateral hazards, the players will treat them like such. Even if it is against the RoG. This is why there should not be any changes to actual wordings of the rules in HC, to eliminate the possibility of different interpretations.

There have been those before.

Do we know what is insurance policy in Malesia (or where ever his insurance is from)? Suicide does not necessarily rule out payout, not all is Hollywood.

If using a "putting ball" in competitions is such a problem, then they should have used the real wording from the rules, not some sort of bastardized version. OTOH, why do they not include the whole rules book with hard card...

It is always irrational when supernatural beings are brought in to explain earthly happenings. Whatever side of the pond it is.

One of issues is that TM states all the numbers as facts, measured or calculated but as facts. There is no mention (on result screen) about accuracy of each figure. It just states spin 3650, not +-200. This seems too exact to actually be true. TM and Flightscope are good and useful, but they are not foolproof.

Even if they track the club head they do not know the face angles. When do they start to track the ball after impact and when is the spin value measured?

You are correct. The hole is a hole made by maintenance and as such a GUR. Rule 25-1 states: a. Interference Interference by an abnormal ground condition occurs when a ball lies in or touches the condition or when the condition interferes with the player's stance or the area of his intended swing. If the player's ball lies on the putting green, interference also occurs if an abnormal ground condition on the putting green intervenes on his line of putt. Otherwise, intervention on the line of play is not, of itself, interference under this Rule.

Whatever the club design, the sweet spot is the same size, i.e. very small spot on face. Most likely any CB iron is in GI category on Matlbys ratings.

I hate being called Caucasian, not that I have anything against people living in Caucasus region.

Perhaps more US thing? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orient

Is Oriental a derogatory term? And if so, then about who and about what period of time? These are honest questions.