Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

14 Off to a Great Start

About fredf

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

228 profile views
  1. First, to confirm, I was only referring to Bonvivant's dashing red ball, the original picture issue is very clear cut as previously discussed. And as I posted, and you clearly agree, the likelihood is about as remote as remote can be. But on your hole liner point - which I agree plays a role in that very low likelihood - I simply note it doesn't prevent the possibility because: 1) there is no requirement under the rules for a hole to have a liner and 2) if used, the requirement is that it be sunk at least one inch below the level of the green. So even just for hypothetical discussion, I think Bonvivant's picture poses interesting rules issues. And questions that the Rules do not or cannot unambiguously answer in their current form are very few and far between.
  2. The picture is interesting. Let's put aside the wrinkle that the likelihood is so close to zero to probably not matter. IMO, the Rules do not provide an answer here, because it is entirely outside the situations that the Rules and Definitions are intended for. Consequently, this discussion is just speculation. Rule 13.2c, ball against flagstick, does not apply. Rule 13.3, ball overhanging hole, does not apply because of line 1 "if any part of the ball overhangs the LIP of the hole", which is not the case here. So we are left with trying to extract an answer from Holed/1's words: When a ball is embedded in the side of the hole, and all of the ball is not below the surface of the putting green, the ball is not holed. For me, the ball is 1) embedded and 2) in the side of the hole, but it is not embedded in the side of the hole. But this is an arguable semantic distinction. If you want an answer, I think you need to send it in to the USGA. They may reply with "call me when it happens".
  3. You are hitting the main arguments. Improving your lie is inconsistent with the Rules. Ruling Bodies have given careful consideration to any reasonable Local Rules that can be defended in particular conditions, published as Model Local Rules (76 of them). This isn't one of them and that is no accident. And there is also a process for special case consideration through your State/National body, but 'winter' doesn't cut it for a bunker, it's not like the grass dying off in the fairway. And fairway is supposed to be the playable area, bunkers are supposed to be a challenge and one best avoided. So unless you have a nightly attack of a gaggle of rampant geese partying in your bunkers, I don't see any special case. In many courses across diverse parts of the golfing world, this issue of weather affected or poorly maintained bunkers is chronic - it is nothing to do with winter. My club grooms them once a week and between those times, ie most of the time, their condition is average to appalling. This not only reflects the average poor behaviour of players but the sand is all different in texture and depth and even the watering systems cause them grief. So for any organised competition/tournaments, suck it up, it's called golf. Learning to play the shots you need is preferable to avoiding the trickier ones. Social golf is another thing. Rake away if that is your preference. And please leave the bunker in better shape than you found it. PS If the bunkers (or some) are genuinely unplayable for whatever reason, the Committee can close them down by defining them as GUR.
  4. There already is a Model Local Rule for enabling a provisional ball for a ball in a penalty area, so this might be misunderstood as a widening of the provisional ball rule. It should only be used in very limited circumstances - see the Preamble to MLR B-3 on pages 456-7 of the Official Guide.
  5. A couple of advice issues that merit underlining, IMO: 1) 1.3c(4)/3 advises clearly that asking what the wind direction is constitutes advice. I don't recall seeing such a clear statement prior to 2019. 2) Advice comes in three flavours - a key observation that is somewhat buried in Advice/2 above. The flavours relate to a) choosing a club b) how to make a stroke and c) how to play a hole. So if you say "Wow, is that wind into our face? Do I need to play a low, punch shot?", then congratulations, you have collected 4SP.
  6. That latter case (on the putting green) is explicitly covered in Interpretation 23.8a(2)/1, second bullet point.
  7. Correct, 'buddy' gets the general penalty. And the smart a$$ of the day award.
  8. To acknowledge the source: the USGA basic and intermediate quiz questions are taken from the Blakey 500 question set. The USGA advanced question set are an original set of a further 200 questions.
  9. I recall hearing a Tom Watson quote to that effect - you never forget the rule that jumped up and bit you when it mattered. My additional suggestion once you are making progress on the journey is test, test, test. There are excellent helpful quiz sites courtesy of the likes of Dr Lew Blakey (the single best site- generalarea.org), the R&A, the USGA etc.
  10. From memory (I am travelling and don't have current access) there are diagrams of complex situations like this in the 2016 Decisions book, see D1-4/8 and D1-4/8.5. Not the exact OP but the principles are the same and nothing here has changed in 2019.
  11. I was only citing the words from Michael Bamberger's well-written article, not contesting anything you said. I'd be confident Bamberger had tongue-in-cheek or a cautious company lawyer. Indeed, absolutely shameless. Smacks of someone that thinks the world owes him and suggests a person that will repeat the crime endlessly while getting away with it.
  12. Lied? Just a seemingly inaccurate recounting. This is a Rules slam dunk, can't see the 'rules officials are only there to help, not to penalise' standing up in court.
  13. Nice diagram, helps emphasize the point that fairway reference point is only a means to the end of defining the relief area, which may be considerably closer to the green than the fairway reference point itself. In the most extreme case, that point is the teeing area played from.
  14. As Iacas has re-awakened this one...... I entirely agree with the quote above, but it is inevitably subjective just when too much digging in occurs - it's one of those kind of rules. As a player, the moral is why would you take a risk with this and risk a penalty. But I do take some issue with the following quote from an earlier thread: Your ball was originally going to be below your feet, but by digging in, you gave yourself a level lie. You improved the conditions affecting your stroke. Giving yourself a level lie is not the definition of digging in too much. It would depend on the situation and in the photo in the OP with those gentle slopes and assuming a right-handed player it would appear that getting the feet level with the ball is unlikely to be digging in too much. But, of course, that is just one example.
  15. This ball warming is an entirely fresh debate in 2019 because there were notable changes to the Rule (now 4.2a(2)) and there is also no interpretation/explanation of the change. However, a plain reading of the current rule suggests any prior year understanding/interpretation may well be wrong - that playing any ball now that has been deliberately warmed (regardless of when), such that the playing characteristics have been altered, is a breach of the Rule. And the penalty now has stepped up to DQ (previously 2SP first offence).
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...