rogolf

Imo, a notice is not required. Such actions are not showing respect for the golf course. Pull/push carts should never be on tee boxes, fringes or putting greens. If you show that much disrespect for the course, the course gods will get even with you through bad bounces, plugged lies in bunkers etc.

Yes, they probably do, but they need to be pulled or pushed by somebody, and the cumulative impact of that somebody plus the cart is greater than just the somebody.

I'm going to take the opposite view. Since the player did not announce which ball he wanted to score, the first ball played must count. It was played according to the Rules, as it lies, and the player incurs a two stroke penalty for the general breach of Rule 18-2a.

As noted previously, Rule 16-1a gives many instances where you are permitted to touch the line of putt, - in removing loose impediments - addressing the ball in front of the ball - measuring - lifting or replacing a ball - pressing down a ball marker - in repairing old hole plugs and ball marks on the putting green - removing movable obstructions Rule 16-1c says that the player may repair ball marks on the putting green whether or not his ball lies on the putting green. The Rule does not give any limitations to repairing ball marks on the putting green.

Yes, it is a line of play. However, the Rules permit repair of ball marks that are on the green at any time, and this includes those ball marks on the line of play or line of putt. The permission to repair damage to the putting green is clearly stated in Rule 13-2, and 13-2 refers to Rule 16-1.

When I'm doing set up, which includes both hole location and tee location, I'm very aware of where the tees are set with respect to hole location. It may not make much difference on a very long par five, but it certainly does on shorter par fours and always on par threes. If I set up a potentially drivable par 4, I will always make it a very tough hole location - typically short and just over a bunker or near a drop off (if you really want to drive low handicappers nuts, put out 18 short hole locations). On other holes, I'll always try to find a way to hide the bottom of the flag stick. It's fun trying to tease the players. However, in the final analysis, the hole locations need to be balanced between left and right (to me, a center hole location is "neutral"), but there is no need to balance front, center and back.

And permitted by the Rules of golf, see Decision 27/20. Note that the Decision clearly states that without such a local Rule, the ball is in bounds.

No, not the same circumstances.

I agree that could be an issue. In such a competition, it would be very worthwhile to ensure that all of the tee markers are placed at their respective stone markers or within a couple paces thereof. Imo, tournament set ups should not be left to the greens crew unless they have been provided specific instructions by the Committee. Anything that goes wrong is the fault of the organizing Committee, not the greens crew.

AFAIK, the course ratings are done ignoring any non-conforming local Rules (such as the one above regarding bunkers). If you really want to do research, visit http://www.popeofslope.com/index.html Also, in the area where I am (Pacific Northwest), the state and provincial associations hold annual meetings of the course raters to ensure there is consistency in rating amongst the group. Perhaps an explanation for the change in rating could be obtained from the association that did the rating? They must recognize it's a significant change and have an appropriate explanation.

This isn't nickel and dime stuff! I was always taught that two things not the same are different - and that's the case here - handicaps and course ratings are not the same as nickels and dimes. There's a lot more significance to handicaps than a three cent difference in change. I'm old enough to remember when getting change from a nickel was significant - nobody would ever round $0.03 up to $0.05 when I was growing up. I will stay with the USGA perspective, tenths of stroke ratings are important.

I've stated my opinions, and am happy to continue with them. If you consider that a difference of 0.3 in course rating isn't significant, why doesn't the USGA just give ratings to the nearest 0.5, ie, never have a course rating other than 69.5, 70.0, 70.5 etc? Maybe they do the number to the nearest tenth of a stroke because they consider a tenth to be significant?

Yes, I have also rated courses using the USGA system, and, imo, 90 yards short is significant. It can be equalized by being 90 yards long the next day, but do courses really keep track of such settings? I doubt it very much. It's very frustrating when the white tees (example only) are consistently set up short, often in a foolhardy attempt to improve pace of play (people are responsible for slow play, course set up won't improve it to any great extent). Those who play this shortened course consistently then end up with lower indexes than their capability and complain when players from other courses consistently whup them in net events. For handicap indexes to truly reflect the player's capability, the courses must be set up to average the rated length over a relatively short period of time (maybe every week).

A quote from the post above from the USGA handicap manual: A difference of 22 yards for men or 18 yards for women will change the USGA course rating 0.1 of a stroke. Five yards short on every hole is 90 yards short in total, and the course rating for those tees would be 0.4 low for men, 0.5 low for women - that's significant in my opinion. If you play the course set up like that every day, your handicap will be artificially low, since you're playing a course with a lower rating than the correct rating.

Not necessary to have them all positioned in relation to the stone markers, so long as the total course yardage is at/near the rated length. Think of it this way - if the white tee markers on hole no. 1 are 5 yards in front of the stone markers, it's a minus 5; on hole two the white markers are 15 yards behind the stone marker, that's a plus 15. Total to date is plus 10. Do that for all eighteen holes and if the sum is near zero, the course is playing to its rated length. Same applies for all other tee sets.

As I said previously, and your post confirms, it's the "course length" that is important, not the individual hole length. The USGA don't say to place tee markers at the back of the tee box when the hole is cut on the front of the green. For example, members don't want to have all the holes play the same length every day - a variety is much preferred.

I disagree that the tee markers for each hole should be set based on pin position for that hole. For handicapping purposes, it is not necessary that each hole play to its "rated" length, but that the course (total of all holes) plays to near its rated length. When courses use a rotation of front, center and back hole locations, the average is "center". Therefore it's only where the tee markers are placed with respect to the permanent yardage markers that is important. It's all in the USGA handicap manual.

Don't make excuses for his actions - there are no excuses that will work for him. As a hockey coach once said, "you can't fix stupid."

No, it's true for some European countries and ought to be considered in NA.

There should be an elementary Rules test that all players must pass before they're allowed to play on a golf course, like a driver's license. (Oh, there is, in some European countries!)

If the stakes and ropes are meant to be immovable obstructions and are that close to the cart path, it's common to notify the competitors that they are to be considered as a single immovable obstruction. It's done that way to make it easy for the players to play within the Rules - not requiring two separate relief situations. Players would tend to take relief from both in one step, and without such a declaration in the notice, they could well end up in a wrong place (and penalty) situation. These are things that must be considered by the referees who are marking the course.

I don't believe the highlighted statement is true, assuming that you are saying the ball is on the path, but on the right side of center. See diagram 2 in the post above.

It's a question of fact whether or not the ball crossed the line - one must collect all the facts, not just opinions. Perhaps there is a ball mark? Maybe someone else saw it?

Always recall that there is no two club length option for a water hazard (yellow stakes or lines). That option is only available if the water hazard is a lateral water hazard (red stakes or lines).

Decision 30-1/1 explains that only the last stroke played out of order could be recalled. The first one stands as made once the second ball is played.