rogolf

Play the course as it is marked - right or wrong, or risk DQ. Discuss with the Committee after the round.

I don't think such a blanket statement is correct. Depending on the location of the flagstick (hole) and where the ball last crossed the margin of the lateral water hazard, there may well be an opposite margin and equidistant point that can be used.

Let's not forget about 26-1c(ii) for a LWH, a point on an opposite margin equidistant from the hole to where the ball last crossed the margin of the LWH. And drvfrshow, let's forget about where the ball first crossed the margin of the WH or LWH, that point is irrelevant; the only relevant point is where the ball last crossed the margin of the WH/LWH.

What's the big deal about hitting a provisional when a ball may be lost or may be out of bounds? If you know (or don't know) the golf course, just hit the provisional, that's what the Rule is for.

http://www.ruleshistory.com/green.html

Yes, it carries on the tradition of The Open Championship, as it should be!

You would be correct some of the time, but not for the professional tours. The Rules do permit the Committee to implement a condition of competition that the player must use the same brand and model of ball for the stipulated round, and such ball must be on the approved list (page 138 of the Rule book).

Of course you mean "The Open Championship" (its correct name)? :) Even though the one ball condition is not on the R&A; hard card, it has been in effect at previous Open Championships and I presume it still is. The R&A; hard card applies to all the amateur events the R&A; runs and they do not use the one ball condition in those events.

OK

That rock never becomes an immovable obstruction (without alteration of some sort) - it is a loose impediment.

From the definition of obstructions - "an obstruction is a movable obstruction if it may be moved without unreasonable effort, without unduly delaying play and without causing damage. Otherwise, it is an immovable obstruction." The rock Tiger et al moved was not an obstruction, it was a loose impediment.

There is an anomaly in your response. While the USGA is the governing body which establishes the Rules of golf (along with the R&A;), they do not regulate the PGA Tour. The Tour plays by the Rules of golf (as established by the USGA and R&A;) and are responsible for enforcing the rules (including the one ball condition) on the Tour. I sincerely doubt that what you have posted is actually true - it does not satisfy the one ball condition implemented by the Tour.

Read Decision 33-6/3 above.

No, his withdrawing from the playoff does not affect the results for the event, other than he won't be the winner. In a two person playoff, the person who withdraws from the playoff would finish second in the event itself.

The above was posted based on observation of a playoff between Jim Furyk and Brian Davis (when his backswing touched a loose impediment in a lateral water hazard beside the green). The head Rules official still had Furyk complete the hole. However, I've just been reminded of Decision 33-6/3 (below) which suggests a player can withdraw or concede defeat - not quite the same as conceding strokes. 33-6/3 Determining Winner and Positions in Stroke-Play Play-Off If there is a stroke-play play-off between two competitors and one of them is disqualified or concedes defeat, it is not necessary for the other to complete the play-off hole or holes to be declared the winner. If there is a play-off involving more than two competitors and not all of them complete the play-off hole or holes, the order in which the competitors are disqualified or decide to withdraw determines the result of the play-off. (Revised)

There are no concessions in stroke play. The other player (who going to win) still has to hole out to finalize the playoff.

I would call that step 0, before 1. He must announce that he is going to play two balls and which ball he wishes to score with, before taking further action.

Someone referenced it earlier - the stance must be taken in the least intrusive manner. "Backing in" usually does not meet that standard. You could place one foot in place for the stance and then place the other foot by stepping around and above many of the branches. Sometimes an unplayable is a far more certain way of getting out without risk, including risk of penalty.

Ok, make one and submit it to the USGA for approval, as per the preamble to Rule 4. I wouldn't bet on a positive outcome.

I rest my case. Good night.

It's unfortunate that you're not willing to accept an opinion that differs from your own. Instead you choose to rip those posts that offer different views. Such behaviour will obviously inhibit others from posting. Back to the topic at hand with an update - Decision 10-2c/2 was in effect prior to the ruling that Wendy obtained in 2000. Are you suggesting that the USGA was unaware of this Decision when Wendy obtained the ruling, or are you just going to be contrary? While I said that I was "finished", I cannot let what I consider wrong opinions to persist, and the last post be perceived as correct.

Incredible! Such censoring!

Guess I'm not quite finished, need to correct one thing - I would have no gripe at you in the situation you've described. My point was regarding the "honour", which only exists on the teeing ground.

If we choose to do it on occasion for some odd and justified reason, other than giving anyone an advantage, that could be fine. This has been taken out of context. The context intended was pertaining to the specific incident of playing out of turn for some odd and justified reason (saving time, retrieving a club, washroom break) could be fine, ie, might not be a breach of the specific Rule. The wording was purposely chosen since "circumstances alter cases" and the above statement is not be true in all situations, and definitely not intended or true for all Rules. The Decisions tell us when a specific action may or may not be within the Rules (some odd and justified reason could be fine). Now I'm finished.

It's apparent that you will choose to do what you want to do. Just don't suggest that we agree, before we begin, to play out of turn unilaterally. I believe that such an agreement is a breach of 1-3. If we choose to do it on occasion for some odd and justified reason, other than giving anyone an advantage, that could be fine. However, if I have the honour and you try to play before me, don't get offended when I object. "Ready golf" is not the salvation for slow play and shouldn't be presented as such. I don't think this needs to be debated any further as we all understand and appreciate each others' position with respect to the Rules.