sacm3bill

Thought I'd update this thread with some info, given I've just booked Pebble for November: With the current policies/prices, reserving a tee time more than 24 hours in advance will cost you around $3300, plus the cost of the round ($595 at this time). This comes from the current policy being a 3 night stay requirement for advance tee times, and the lowest rate for any of the 3 properties being around $1000/night, + 10% taxes. (It's possible there are deals to be found, potentially if an NCGA member, but I'm not aware of any at this time.) [Admins: I know this is an old thread but a search for threads about playing Pebble did not pop up anything newer. Also, since now is around the time the OP was shooting to make their trip, this may be timely. But feel free to move to a more appropriate thread.]

Actually, Pebble does have a "turn", in the original sense of the word in fact. If my history is correct, the original links courses usually had hole 9 at the farthest point on the course, then you "turned" to come back and play the 2nd 9 holes - kinda like Pebble. Over the years, the "turn" has come to mean the point between hole 9 and 10 regardless of where that point was - even though at most courses that's back at the clubhouse. To your point though, yeah it would be hard to get balls at hole #10 on Pebble, unless maybe there's a snack and equipment shop there. I do see some kind of structure there on Google Earth...

Is there any way to know what the PCC was for a given day on a given course if you don't have an official handicap? If not, then I guess the days of figuring your own handicap are over?

I'll give you that the mortality rate might for Covid might be less accurate because the people with obvious symptoms can't be tested as readily. But I was responding to the quote from Eric where he said "The mortality rate is almost a complete unknown right now, because it does not include people who had the disease and suffered no or little symptoms, and so were never tested". My point is simply that, likewise, the rate for seasonal flu could not include people who had the flu and suffered little or no symptoms (since those people don't get tested - in fact even people *with* greater symptoms don't all get tested - I know I never have). Yet they still manage to come up with a mortality rate.

Honest question: Aren't the methods used to get Covid mortality rate the same methods used for any other illness, like flu? I.e., we don't know how many people had the flu but didn't show symptoms, or had symptoms but weren't treated, but we must have a way of estimating the accepted mortality numbers. So are the numbers for Covid any less accurate than those for the flu? If so why, and if not then isn't it reasonable to compare Covid mortality rate numbers to those of the flu, and in so doing legitimately say Covid is at least 20x more fatal?

Ah, that's right. The rule makes sense then - if your ball is in a precarious position, better hurry up and mark it if on the green, or hit it if not (since you can't mark off the green).

If I read the rules correctly, if a ball at rest moves while on the green it's placed back in its original position. If it moves while off the green, it's played from its new position. (Which is why Ricky lost a stroke for having to take it out of the water again.) So my question to the rules gurus: What's the rationale for the rule being different depending on whether on the green or not?

That's not right. She did not penalize herself, thus, her scorecard was incorrect. I didn't say she penalized herself for the incorrect placement, my point is simply that she *was* penalized for it (by the committee in this case). So she was penalized once for the incorrect placement, then penalized again for a scorecard that was only incorrect because of that incorrect placement.

I agree with this too. The scorecard was only incorrect because of an error she had already been penalized for. Penalizing her again is double indemnity. Like others have said, since the rules allow penalties to be applied after a scorecard has been signed, the scorecard should be allowed to be amended after it's been signed. Put another way, if the score for the round is not final, the scorecard isn't either. And IMO the tax analogy isn't valid because if you make a mistake in a prior year that the IRS deems to be unintentional, you pay only the difference owed plus interest. It's only if they deem it intentional fraud that you pay additional penalties. (Of course, we shouldn't be using taxes as analogies anyway, since golf is not taxes... indeed, as has been said, golf is not even other sports.)

Was in a tournament recently. Declared my ball unplayable at one point. Determined a location to drop about 2 feet away from where it was (i.e. well within the allowed 2 club lengths). Picked up the ball and dropped it. (Didn't roll anywhere since it was a sandy area, so no re-drop rules came into play.) The group in front of me claimed it was an illegal drop because I did not first mark the location of my intended drop with a tee or some such. Were they correct? I've looked through the rules and decisions and have found nothing in the lifting and dropping rules that requires anything to be marked. (Other than when the ball is to be replaced, but that was not the case here.) Certainly I've seen instances in tournaments when taking free relief where a tee is used to mark nearest point of relief and then another tee is used to mark 2 club lengths from the 1st tee, but is that required? (Either in that case or in my unplayable lie scenario.) If so please cite a rule or decision if possible. Thanks.

If you go by Par Plus, you'd enter a 4. (Par plus 0 HC strokes). That's Fourputt's stance, since he believes this is an unplayed hole. If you go by most likely score, you'd enter a 6. (Tee shot + penalty stroke for lost ball, then an extra stroke to account for the hypothetical 2nd tee shot, then the 3 more actual strokes you took.) This is my stance and I believe Erik's as well, since we consider this an unfinished hole. Another possibility is to pick up and call it unfinished, and add Par Plus to the strokes you've already taken. I.e., if you hadn't played the hole at all, Par Plus says to put down a 4. But since you're already lying 2, you'd add that to Par Plus. So you'd enter a 6 in that scenario as well.

Except it's not that simple. ESC is there to limit how high a score you can post so that your handicap isn't artificially high, and that's fine. But if you use Par Plus instead of taking into account strokes and penalties already incurred on a hole, your handicap is going to be artificially low. I would think the USGA's goal is for people to have an *accurate* handicap.

You're of course correct that had a provisional been played he'd be lying 3 from wherever it ended up, not 2, which is why it's more accurate to add 2 when dropping for a lost ball when playing out the hole, which has been recommended in the threads on this subject. What I have always advocated is playing out the hole with the dropped ball (and adding 2 penalty strokes to the tee shot). Yes, I know that's not legal but it at least takes the guesswork out of what you would have taken to hole out - no estimate is needed because you're actually holing out. The only uncertainty is whether you would've successfully put a provisional ball in play somewhere in the area that you lost your first one and made the drop. But it's at least a closer approximation of what you would've scored on the hole than taking Par Plus would be, given Par Plus completely ignores any shots and penalties already incurred. As described above, you don't have to do anything differently if you just play out the hole. If you don't play out the hole and estimate instead, then yes, obviously a low handicapper might estimate a fewer number of shots then a high handicapper. But note that's what Par Plus does as well, when it uses the player's course handicap to determine how many strokes to add to par.

So you're saying USGA answered all my questions, where I summarized my interaction with them? If so you're seeing a lot of things I'm not. Or are you saying USGA has provided answers to my questions somewhere else? If so, link please.