Jump to content


Established Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

33 Plays from the Tips

About fredf

  • Rank
    Well Established Member

Recent Profile Visitors

718 profile views
  1. Bumping the grip ends of the putter avoids this problem.
  2. Absolutely, remember that Jordan Spieth fellow? People were rushing into Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods comparisons.
  3. That has no relevance. #35 advises something you can do and this example fits that situation. #31 advises something you cannot do and this example does not fit that situation.
  4. Different issue, you may "Hold a club on the ground right behind or right next to the ball", see Rule 14.1a.
  5. That's an interesting wrinkle on what we have now. If that 'pitch mark fixer thingy' is longer than two inches and has straight lines on it that are longer than two inches, it is actually not captured by the new 'alignment device' equipment rule - because it is not manufactured as a ball marker.
  6. All true, but in addition: loose impediments such as pine needles may be removed "in any way" (Rule 15.1a). So a brush, broom or leaf blower are not precluded.
  7. Yes. And the red X would need to be the same distance from the pin as the X for opposite side relief (if in place through local rule). You complicate things by talking about whether you slice or hook, lateral and BOL relief is solely a function of where the ball last crossed the edge of the penalty area.
  8. Yep, no-one wants that DQ. Was the US Mail slow?
  9. That USGA diagram is a really poor choice to show what they want to show - that opposite side relief no longer applies unless specified in a Local Rule (we have it on two of our eight holes that are water affected). It's poor because on the ball's position it is possible to go to the opposite side for relief while following the BOL relief option - just as in the OP here. That's going to confuse many that weren't already full bottle on what opposite side relief is exactly.
  10. The previous discussion covered multiple side issues. The original article also had a nice 4 part summary which is all you need. 1. Embedded, not leaning against the flagstick, not fully submerged: NO ACE 2. Embedded, leaning against the flagstick, not fully submerged: NO ACE 3. Embedded, not leaning against the flagstick, fully submerged: YES ACE 4. Not embedded, leaning against the flagstick, fully or partially submerged: YES ACE Another quirky photo popped up here: Of course, two dimensional photos may not give you everything you need to fit the picture into the four categories above. In this case, while the consensus of commentators is ball is not holed, per the interpretation Holed/1 (category 1 or 2 above), I note that depends on whether that ball is actually embedded in ground outside the line of the cup itself. If it merely damaged the ground on the way to being inside the hole cup then it may not remain embedded in the side of the hole. If that is the case, then the ball would be holed if it is touching the flagstick (category 4 above). I suggest it is a much clearer/easier call if you are on the spot, rather than viewing a photo.
  11. Dave You have raised an interesting side discussion. I can advise on this issue with confidence as I have the benefit of an R&A ruling on the application of 17.1a/2 - and the official advice is different to the last sentence in your post. The advice states: 1) There are two different thresholds to be considered. First, the 95 % KVC threshold that the ball is in the water (it doesn't matter whether PA or TW) and second the 50-50 'equally likely' issue to determine which area where the ball has come to rest. 2) So if the player has 95 % confidence the ball is in the water, the player must then use best judgement which area the ball has come to rest in. 3) If the player has no information which would make it more likely than not that the ball was in either condition, the player must default to penalty relief under Rule 17. But if the player believes it is more likely that the ball is in one area (ie more than 50 %) then the player must proceed on the basis the ball is in that area. Applying this advice, if a player has KVC that the ball is in the water and, for example: i. has 60 % probability the ball is in the TW, then free relief is available under 16.1; ii. witnessed the ball landing outside the water and running/bouncing into the water when the edge of the PA is still some distance away, then free relief is available under 16.1;or iii. witnessed the ball landing in the water and has no basis for deciding which side of the PA edge the ball landed in, then penalty relief must be taken under Rule 17.
  12. This from the definition of Penalty Area: When the edge of a body of water is not defined by the Committee, the edge of that penalty area is defined by its natural boundaries (that is, where the ground slopes down to form the depression that can hold the water). So the edge of a penalty area is not influenced by how much water there is. The lake may expand with heavy rain but the penalty area does not. Consequently, any water outside the marked edge of a penalty areas, or in the case of no markings any water that is outside the natural boundaries of that penalty area, is temporary water (free relief available).
  13. Nothing much to add. A ball not found cannot be an embedded ball for the purpose of Rule 16.3. You either dig in and identify it or it is lost ball, stroke and distance, Rule 18.1 or 18.2 (the latter if the search clock has run down).
  14. For clarity, this penalty is purely for a form of play involving a partner. In a singles match, this would not be a Rule 5.5 breach. In this part of the world, "two man match" would be more commonly interpreted as player A versus player B - a match between two players.
  15. Very nice original post, excellent discussion of the issues. For me, should be banned, consigned to the novelty bin. Make then static/fixed item only. IMO, not a positive contribution to the game, diminishes the role of the human skill (bad thing) and encourages even more time wasting on the greens (even worse thing). Next step for me is 1) ban ANY lines on ball markers and, even better... 2) ban caddies - game should be solely about the skill of the golfer during the play of a round. Just getting warmed up.....
  • 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...