Ruler

I meant my question "who are they". I bet it would have not taken too much trouble to leave that snarky remark unwritten and just give out the real information, for which I thank you.

Would it have hurt if you had answered my question?

No, I sincerely hope there is no precedence in incorrect rulings, such as this one. What I am mostly concerned is that there were TWO professional referees who were BOTH wrong. Should not happen, no way. Who is "they" ? And where that clarification can be read/seen?

So be it. Poor jokes are not meant to be understood, IMO.

Is ratio .420 for reputation good or bad? How is it calculated?

No, I am still here but have not been active. Thank You for worrying 😁

Once again intent is the key.

1) I agree but I also think it should be up to the course designer to very carefully think through which depressions are for so called everyday use and which are not. Heavy storm is an extreme example and I would not use a lot of effort to deal with cases such as that but would rather put the focus on depressions where water is frequently present and that fulfil the Definition with regard to collecting and directing water. 2) Now that is rather self-evident, don't you think? It is the criteria what I am after here. This is one of those issues in golf that have no B&W solution and that is why I took it up as it is good to gather many different opinions and I believe that is why people like You and me bother to spend our time on forums like this. Or what do you think?

Dave, how would you define a ditch? How deep / wide / long must it be to be a ditch and not a depression? Must it not be grass-covered? Something else? The term 'other open watercourse' gives lots of latitude IMO...

I must say this is an intriguing issue. On the other hand the Definition of a Penalty Area is very clear and on the other hand any undulation on a fairway built to direct water could be regarded as a PA based on the Definition. So, the question arises: where to draw the line? Any ideas / guidelines / experiences on the matter? Or is the Definition too strict..?

The rocks need not be visible. On order to made a correct judgement one needs to be there and neither of us is.

If it is a French drain then it might be treated as an Immovable Obstruction (or GUR), depending whether there is enough soil on top of the construction or not. Personally I would like to see such channels on top of a French drain to be treated as IO's. After all, it is a construction and makes playing more difficult than on either side of that channel.

From the picture and the posts from the OP I have come to the conclusion that this undulation is built for the purpose of both collecting and directing water (away from the fairway). If that is the case it falls under the Definition of a Penalty Area as it is equivalent to a ditch - an open water course (whether or not containing water). But if it is just an undulation created with no other specific purpose than to satisfy the course designer then it is not a PA and any water in it would be Temporary Water. IMO that is due to the shape of the undulation, the mower blades cannot reach the bottom. But I agree with you, the worn out area could be marked as GUR as long as it is outside the margins of the undulation (no GUR in a PA). It does not matter whether the wear origins from hitting balls, as long as it is a substantially large area and not fit for play.

At this point Erik would say 'this is a Rules forum' and I would concur with him. Making one's own rules is not what golf is about. There is nothing wrong to play golf not abiding to the Rules of Golf but it is IMHO important to know when one is doing that. However, there is no contribution presenting here rules that do not exists.

I beg your pardon? You take a free drop based on which Rule?

Well, that depends on the purpose of that 'channel'. I agree to the 'just play it' but the dispute will begin once there is still water in that 'channel'. Is that Temporary water or is it Penalty Area water..? In the end of the day, it is the responsibility of the course to determine what those undulations are and inform players accordingly.

Well, you may interpret this as you wish. BUT, any ditch or similar designed to collect rain water and/or run it away from the fairway is a Penalty Area by definition, no dispute in there. It does not have to be a 'body of water' as explicitly informed in the Definition: 'even if not containing water'. As far as GUR is concerned the Committee should not declare any area 'difficult to play from' as GUR just because it is difficult to play from that particular part of the course. GUR means Ground Under Repair indicating there will be a change in the conditions later on. A swale designed to run water is not something to be repaired but is an essential part of the course. I have a hard time understanding how it is difficult to play from the area in the picture earlier attached. To me is seems as an undulation similar to any course with undulations. Certainly a 2D picture does not do justice to the depth of the swale so the situation may be very different in real life. Nevertheless, that seems to be something specifically designed to be part of that course so IMHO it should not be declared as GUR unless there is a radical change already planned waiting to be executed. That LR sure is something not supported by the Rules of Golf. No Local Rule may let you advance closer to hole unless there is a Dropping Zone.

On what grounds? It has been mentioned here that the purpose of such swale is to collect and divert water. This is from the Definition of Penalty Area: A penalty area is: •• Any body of water on the course (whether or not marked by the Committee), including a sea, lake, pond, river, ditch, surface drainage ditch or other open watercourse (even if not containing water), Seems pretty straightforward to me. That means also that any water in those swales is NOT Temporary Water and the is NO free relief from them whatsoever.

It appears that Hardsluckster has found the correct terms to answer their question. KVC is used when it is necessary to determine whether a ball is on a specific area of the course or out of bounds. Reasonable judgement is used when it is known in which area a ball is but it is not sure what is the reference point to be used, that is, the point where that ball last crossed the edge of that area (such as a Penalty Area or GUR).

What a mess...

I wish to add to by previous post a rare scenario. Player X putts for 3 and opponent Z concedes X's next stroke while X's ball is in motion. If that ball stops overhanging the hole there are still those 10 seconds for X to wait whether his ball falls into hole. If it does, the concession is void and X's score for the hole is 3.

I am not 100% certain I understand what you mean but the Rules say that the next stroke may be conceded. So, if a ball is moving and the opponent concedes the next stroke it will indeed be the NEXT stroke after the ball in motion stops and is at rest. Unless the ball is holed in which case the concession does not mean anything. So if a player is putting for a birdie and while his ball is in motion his opponent concedes the next stroke and the birdie putt is not holed the player's score for the hole is par.

🤣

And he would answer (just as in my post): 'To eliminate distractions'. Now what?