Rules question folks

Can I describe this one for you comments.I teed off and pulled the ball left towards OB over a ditch but crashing into a tree and disappears from sight.We walk forward and cross the bridge to find the ball has come down just inside the line of OB markers but sitting inside the margin of the hazard on the far side of the ditch (Yellow stakes).My partner insisted you can take the ball back and play from the other side of the ditch but I decided no- that was not possible as the ball crossed the margin last on the far side(coming back) and I couldn't go back in line with the flag as I would at that point be OB.Also I couldn't take relief not nearer as I would either be in the hazard or out of bounds .So back to the tee or play it as is which I did and scuffed it out enough to get a decent 3rd shot away.
Think this was correct .Wheres George when we need him
There are some folk very liberal with the rules .

Not sure I follow, but if it was the wrong side of OB markers, it's OB.

Bit complex to describe.The ball as it lay was in bounds but in the hazard.To go back in line with where it last crossed the hazard would have put me out of bounds

If it was red stakes you find the point it last crossed the hazard. You can replay the shot, drop within two club lengths of crossing point (including equidistant point on other side of hazard), or play somewhere inline with crossing point and pin.

Sounds like you would have to replay the shot or take two club lengths from equidistant point on other side of the hazard.

No offence but how do people not know the basic hazard rules? How many incorrect cards have been signed over your golf career?

Not me Mac.Im always trying to make folk stick to the correct ruling.
It was yellow stakes so I have to go back to the other side of the hazard But the problem being the correct spot/line would be OB.
I was with a decent player I think off 12 but he was quite happy to give me a wrong un.

Some people clearly can't read. Or bother to comment without reading properly. The original post clearly says yellow stakes so nothing to do with lateral hazard rules and also clearly states in was INSIDE the OB markers.

I don't know the definitive answer but I'd say Dyna did the correct thing - either going back to the tee or playing as it lies

If there was nowhere to drop the ball behind the PENALTY AREA because of the OB then your only options are either to play it as it lies, or to go back to the tee.

McLaren wrote:If it was red stakes you find the point it last crossed the hazard. You can replay the shot, drop within two club lengths of crossing point (including equidistant point on other side of hazard), or play somewhere inline with crossing point and pin.

Sounds like you would have to replay the shot or take two club lengths from equidistant point on other side of the hazard.

No offence but how do people not know the basic hazard rules? How many incorrect cards have been signed over your golf career?

Mac - the equidistant drop on the other side of the penalty area has been removed in the 2019 rules. Your options now under rule 17 are -

to play it
to drop it back on the line of the pin and the place it is in the penalty area
to drop it near where it went in
to go back and hit the shot that got you in there again.

Incidentally, the R&A is emphasising that OB is decided by a point on the INSIDE of the OB markers (ie the course side). Part of the ball must be TOUCHING the in bounds course. It's not like football and the 'whole of the ball over the whole of the line' thing. So if you look along the line of the OB markers, and you can see part of your ball, that isn't enough. You have to be sure the ball is touching grass or earth that's in bounds.

George1507 wrote:

Mac - the equidistant drop on the other side of the penalty area has been removed in the 2019 rules.

Bloody hell, I was owned hard there.

McLaren wrote:If it was red stakes you find the point it last crossed the hazard. You can replay the shot, drop within two club lengths of crossing point (including equidistant point on other side of hazard), or play somewhere inline with crossing point and pin.

Sounds like you would have to replay the shot or take two club lengths from equidistant point on other side of the hazard.

No offence but how do people not know the basic hazard rules? How many incorrect cards have been signed over your golf career?

No Mac, it's here you were owned hard

and, no I wasn't sure and so would have ended up playing it as it lay, hacked about, taken 8 or 9 and NR'd.

Anyone know why the red stake rule was changed?

Flushed George out of hiding.
I may not have been very clear on the original post but partner was offering all manner of solutions but I was sure of my limited options .That's seniors golf for you !
I had already hit a provisional and the partner suggested I should continue with that ball which was obviously not the ball in play .

McLaren wrote:Anyone know why the red stake rule was changed?

Just for simplicity. All penalty areas are the same now. Err, except the ones that are different.

I met Kyle Phillips (golf architect) a couple of months ago. I asked him why they keep designing courses with lakes shaped like jigsaw pieces. It makes the task of a rules official in a tournament very difficult because nobody can really be sure where the ball finally went over the margin of the lake. Straight edges would be so much easier. His response? "Hadn't thought of that". Golf Architects seem to abhor straight lines. Depressingly he told me that for 10 years he thought Rockliffe Hall - one of his designs - would be the longest course he would ever design. Now he has commissions for courses to stretch to 9000+ yards. One course will have 4 holes of less than 350 yards (intended as par 3s) and 14 which can stretch to up to 900 yards. Of course there will be lots of tee options, but the amount of land needed for some of these 22nd century championship courses is phenomenal (and water and fertiliser bills will be commensurate).

4 holes which can go up to 900 yards? Are you sure? That would be about a Par 7. Who is commissioning those?

super_realist wrote:4 holes which can go up to 900 yards? Are you sure? That would be about a Par 7. Who is commissioning those?

So if you hole out in 3 shots, would that be called an ostrich?

No Pedro mate it would be called a miracle.If it was an ostrich you would be head down buried in a bunker.

super_realist wrote:4 holes which can go up to 900 yards? Are you sure? That would be about a Par 7. Who is commissioning those?

One is being funded on a 500 acre plot in Nevada by a teachers' pension fund. Work to begin in 2025. Don't know about the other. The goal is to build courses that will host championships in 2100.

dynamark wrote:No Pedro mate  it would be called a miracle.If it was an ostrich you would be head down buried  in a bunker.

George1507 wrote:If there was nowhere to drop the ball behind the PENALTY AREA because of the OB then your only options are either to play it as it lies, or to go back to the tee.

McLaren wrote:If it was red stakes you find the point it last crossed the hazard. You can replay the shot, drop within two club lengths of crossing point (including equidistant point on other side of hazard), or play somewhere inline with crossing point and pin.

Sounds like you would have to replay the shot or take two club lengths from equidistant point on other side of the hazard.

No offence but how do people not know the basic hazard rules? How many incorrect cards have been signed over your golf career?

Mac - the equidistant drop on the other side of the penalty area has been removed in the 2019 rules. Your options now under rule 17 are -

to play it
to drop it back on the line of the pin and the place it is in the penalty area
to drop it near where it went in
to go back and hit the shot that got you in there again.

Incidentally, the R&A is emphasising that OB is decided by a point on the INSIDE of the OB markers (ie the course side). Part of the ball must be TOUCHING the in bounds course. It's not like football and the 'whole of the ball over the whole of the line' thing. So if you look along the line of the OB markers, and you can see part of your ball, that isn't enough. You have to be sure the ball is touching grass or earth that's in bounds.

Thanks for the clarification George. I was going to get my rule book out but then wondered why others didn’t! And thanks for reminding everyone they are now PENALTY AREAS not hazards. We’re now almost 5 months into the new rules and more than a year since they were first mooted but it seems the majority of golfers, professionals included, are still unsure.

LadyPutt wrote:
Thanks for the clarification George. I was going to get my rule book out but then wondered why others didn’t! And thanks for reminding everyone they are now PENALTY AREAS not hazards. We’re now almost 5 months into the new rules and more than a year since they were first mooted but it seems the majority of golfers, professionals included, are still unsure.

In the Masters there was an incident where Zach Johnson (I think it was him) accidentally knocked his ball off the tee when he was getting ready to drive. It took a rules official and over 5 minutes to sort it out. Is there a club player anywhere on the planet that doesn't know what to do in that situation? Play is slow enough without players braking it to a crawl.

I played in a team thing on Sunday and I noticed everywhere the pro trait of getting to the ball, looking around, checking distances, throwing grass in the air (on a calm day), having a chat, check the distance again, pull out a club and put it back, more chat, then finally get another club and hit it. It took 4½ hours, which most everyone though was pretty good. I've played in slower comps, but I understand some people can't spend 5+ hours on golf when they have family commitments. The clubs don't help - why put the tee markers right at the very back when it's a non qualifier? Move them forward, especially on holes into the wind, or when there's gobs of trouble.

George1507 wrote:

super_realist wrote:4 holes which can go up to 900 yards? Are you sure? That would be about a Par 7. Who is commissioning those?

One is being funded on a 500 acre plot in Nevada by a teachers' pension fund. Work to begin in 2025. Don't know about the other. The goal is to build courses that will host championships in 2100.

Madness. I can design courses with huge holes; give me the money instead. Can't they actually design a decent course anymore? You know, one that makes players think and that they can't simply bomb their way around?

I watched the incident re Zach Johnson live on TV. Unless there was a tape delay his playing partners (one of whom was Poulter) told him to re tee and play on, which he did. There was a bit of banter but no delay.

George1507 wrote:

super_realist wrote:4 holes which can go up to 900 yards? Are you sure? That would be about a Par 7. Who is commissioning those?

One is being funded on a 500 acre plot in Nevada by a teachers' pension fund. Work to begin in 2025. Don't know about the other. The goal is to build courses that will host championships in 2100.

What I seriously doubt though is that it is the shape of things to come, probably some pathetic attempt for some toilet in Nevada to make a name for itself by having the most insane golf course in the world and thus put itself on the map like some of the world's other worst tourist attractions.

navyblueshorts wrote:

George1507 wrote:

super_realist wrote:4 holes which can go up to 900 yards? Are you sure? That would be about a Par 7. Who is commissioning those?

One is being funded on a 500 acre plot in Nevada by a teachers' pension fund. Work to begin in 2025. Don't know about the other. The goal is to build courses that will host championships in 2100.

Madness. I can design courses with huge holes; give me the money instead. Can't they actually design a decent course anymore? You know, one that makes players think and that they can't simply bomb their way around?

Discernment, subtlety, sophistication, integrity, elegance are not exactly words you associate with American design of anything Navy.

They've always been a gung-ho, vulgar, brash, blunt country so I wouldn't expect them to bat an eyelid at such a monstrosity.

super_realist wrote:
Discernment, subtlety, sophistication, integrity, elegance are not exactly words you associate with American design of anything Navy.

They've always been a gung-ho, vulgar, brash, blunt country so I wouldn't expect them to bat an eyelid at such a monstrosity.

Yeh because they are only the nation of AGNC, Shinnicock, Merion, Sans Hills, Fishers, NGLA, Bandon, Cypress etc. Such a vulgar set of poorly designed courses.

Jesus Christ Mac, I'm talking about design in GENERAL. As usual you have to jump on the bloody literal without actually reading PROPERLY

super_realist wrote:Discernment, subtlety, sophistication, integrity, elegance are not exactly words you associate with American design of anything Navy

I was talking about all American design, cars, buildings, golf courses, fashion, cities etc. Americans are not known for quality design, so a few golf courses in a desert of carbunkles doesn't make them amazing at design all of a sudden, hence why no one would bat an eyelid at a course with the potential for fourteen 900 yard courses.

Anyway, you always bang on about how poor American golf course design is with the forced carries and superfluous water, so don't pretend you're actually a fan of the design there and it would seem you are  just reacting because it is me who has said something and because you like to be contrary.

McLaren wrote:

super_realist wrote:
Discernment, subtlety, sophistication, integrity, elegance are not exactly words you associate with American design of anything Navy.

They've always been a gung-ho, vulgar, brash, blunt country so I wouldn't expect them to bat an eyelid at such a monstrosity.

Yeh because they are only the nation of AGNC, Shinnicock, Merion, Sans Hills, Fishers, NGLA, Bandon, Cypress etc.  Such a vulgar set of poorly designed courses.

Mac, MacKenzie was British & C B McDonald was Canadian, yes there are great American designed courses out there but even many of those were greatly influenced by visits by the great architects to these shores.

I would also suggest on the other hand that yes there is fantastic subtlety in some American designs, how many people said Merion would get torn apart by the big boys in 2013?... it simply didn’t happen. PB is another fine example that you can be at or around 7000 yards and still be subtely brutal.

JAS wrote:
Mac, MacKenzie was British & C B McDonald was Canadian

Thanks Jas, I wasn't aware of that.

JAS wrote:I would also suggest on the other hand that yes there is fantastic subtlety in some American designs, how many people said Merion would get torn apart by the big boys in 2013?... it simply didn’t happen. PB is another fine example that you can be at or around 7000 yards and still be subtely brutal.

Almost oxymoronic at first glance and yet and at the same time perfectly apt and accurate. A better bit of description I haven't seen for some time. My comment doesn't add anything to the discussion but I liked that JAS.

Roller_Coaster wrote:

JAS wrote:I would also suggest on the other hand that yes there is fantastic subtlety in some American designs, how many people said Merion would get torn apart by the big boys in 2013?... it simply didn’t happen. PB is another fine example that you can be at or around 7000 yards and still be subtely brutal.

Almost oxymoronic at first glance and yet and at the same time perfectly apt and accurate. A better bit of description I haven't seen for some time. My comment doesn't add anything to the discussion but I liked that JAS.

...the kind of place where you go round thinking...”I’m playing quite well today - striking the ball nicely - oh what wonderful vistas as well...now let me tot up my score....WHAAAAT??? 90 what? How did that happen? :-p

I am fortunate to play a lot of fine courses in the US and (and over the years in the UK). Merion's architect,  Hugh Wilson, went on a 7 month trip to visit English and Scottish courses before he constructed Merion. Not mentioned here yet is Pine Valley: mostly designed by George Crump but both William Flynn and Harry Colt get some credit for the work there. I won't comment on Super's simplistic and broad generalization of things 'Merican, but suffice to say there are an extraordinary number of great courses here in these United States (some of which I may never get access to), but many that are either public or pretty easy to get on. I've said this before, but I would never tire of playing the great heathland courses south of London.

McLaren wrote:

JAS wrote:
Mac, MacKenzie was British & C B McDonald was Canadian

Thanks Jas, I wasn't aware of that.

Surely you knew Dr MacKenzie was a doctor from Leeds? Thought you were an aficionado of golf course design?

Are you f*ing kidding me?

I seem to have been responsible for transmogrifying this rules thread to golf architecture. Sorry. But since I did then I should point out that James Braid is the man responsible for influencing all architects since.

Not only was he one of the best players of his era - 5 Open wins - he created loads of courses that are completely playable today, and he did it all with just 6 blokes and four horses he rescued from WWI. There's a story from the 1930s - and I so hope it's true - that reigning Open Champion Henry Cotton asked Braid to tell him everything he knew about building golf courses. Braid said it would cost him £2000 (much more the Open winner's prize), but he'd do it for nothing if Cotton could beat him in a match over the Kings Course at Gleneagles. So while he was getting ready for the Open at Muirfield Cotton took the bet. And James Braid beat him 5&4.

Oh please let it be true. I love stuff like that.

McLaren wrote:

JAS wrote:
Mac, MacKenzie was British & C B McDonald was Canadian

Thanks Jas, I wasn't aware of that.

How did you not know that Mac? You claim to be a student of golf course architecture. I don't think I know anyone who didn't know that Augusta was designed by McKenzie.

You can't read books on design and not have picked up on where these guys come from, and don't tell me it isn't in the books.

You'll be telling me you've never heard of The Great Triumverate next.

Super

Apparently like jas the sarcasm went over your head.

super_realist wrote:

McLaren wrote:

JAS wrote:
Mac, MacKenzie was British & C B McDonald was Canadian

Thanks Jas, I wasn't aware of that.

How did you not know that Mac? You claim to be a student of golf course architecture. I don't think I know anyone who didn't know that Augusta was designed by McKenzie.

You can't read books on design and not have picked up on where these guys come from, and don't tell me it isn't in the books.

You'll be telling me you've never heard of The Great Triumverate next.

Ball, Harvey and Kendall?

Holy Trinity

McLaren wrote:Super

Apparently like jas the sarcasm went over your head.

I wouldn't have put it past you Mac to have not known that, especially in the context of the conversation when you ignored all the non American designers of those courses you mentioned.

But the American owners used their own taste to pick the architect and final design of the course.

You can't ignore the commissioners in art and architecture.

George1507 wrote:I seem to have been responsible for transmogrifying this rules thread to golf architecture. Sorry. But since I did then I should point out that James Braid is the man responsible for influencing all architects since.

Not only was he one of the best players of his era - 5 Open wins - he created loads of courses that are completely playable today, and he did it all with just 6 blokes and four horses he rescued from WWI. There's a story from the 1930s - and I so hope it's true - that reigning Open Champion Henry Cotton asked Braid to tell him everything he knew about building golf courses. Braid said it would cost him £2000 (much more the Open winner's prize),  but he'd do it for nothing if Cotton could beat him in a match over the Kings Course at Gleneagles. So while he was getting ready for the Open at Muirfield Cotton took the bet. And James Braid beat him 5&4.

Oh  please let it be true. I love stuff like that.

Love anecdotes like that as well George. Aside from that I also love Braid courses, St Enodoc being a particular favourite. It is remarkable what they came up with given the relatively limited resources compared to modern course building.

Very much in agreement JAS on the limited resources point.No earthmoving equipment to speak of and it shows its not necessary if you have the right site and imagination.Great credit to those guys but they were given some lovely canvass to work on.
I have been fortunate to be on the design/build side on a couple of courses on low budget and its a very rewarding thing to look at as it develops.You see your mistakes as well.

McLaren wrote:You can't ignore the commissioners in art and architecture.

You can't be serious Mac.

Do you actually give a toss who commissioned St Paul's Cathedral or the Guggenheim or the Sydney Opera house? Do you care who commissioned Wentworth, Augusta or St.Andrews? No one gives the slightest f**k who commissioned anything.

JAS wrote:

George1507 wrote:I seem to have been responsible for transmogrifying this rules thread to golf architecture. Sorry. But since I did then I should point out that James Braid is the man responsible for influencing all architects since.

Not only was he one of the best players of his era - 5 Open wins - he created loads of courses that are completely playable today, and he did it all with just 6 blokes and four horses he rescued from WWI. There's a story from the 1930s - and I so hope it's true - that reigning Open Champion Henry Cotton asked Braid to tell him everything he knew about building golf courses. Braid said it would cost him £2000 (much more the Open winner's prize),  but he'd do it for nothing if Cotton could beat him in a match over the Kings Course at Gleneagles. So while he was getting ready for the Open at Muirfield Cotton took the bet. And James Braid beat him 5&4.

Oh  please let it be true. I love stuff like that.

Love anecdotes like that as well George. Aside from that I also love Braid courses, St Enodoc being a particular favourite. It is remarkable what they came up with given the relatively limited resources compared to modern course building.

Yes brilliant George thanks

super_realist wrote:

McLaren wrote:You can't ignore the commissioners in art and architecture.

You can't be serious Mac.

Do you actually give a toss who commissioned St Paul's Cathedral or the Guggenheim or the Sydney Opera house? Do you care who commissioned Wentworth, Augusta or St.Andrews? No one gives the slightest f**k who commissioned anything.

Ironic eh? If one extrapolates Mac's point, he's presumably impressed that the Roman Catholic Church commissioned all that fine art and architecture throughout history. No, didn't think so.

We’re surrounded by Braid courses in my corner of Fife and I’m delighted that my home course, Lundin Ladies, even though it is a 9-hole gem, is a Braid as well. Makes playing it twice well worth it!

navyblueshorts wrote:

super_realist wrote:

McLaren wrote:You can't ignore the commissioners in art and architecture.

You can't be serious Mac.

Do you actually give a toss who commissioned St Paul's Cathedral or the Guggenheim or the Sydney Opera house? Do you care who commissioned Wentworth, Augusta or St.Andrews? No one gives the slightest f**k who commissioned anything.

Ironic eh? If one extrapolates Mac's point, he's presumably impressed that the Roman Catholic Church commissioned all that fine art and architecture throughout history. No, didn't think so.

Mac seems the pretentious type who actually cares who the director of a film is before he goes to the cinema, probably even asks who the projectionist is too.

LadyPutt wrote:We’re surrounded by Braid courses in my corner of Fife and I’m delighted that my home course, Lundin Ladies, even though it is a 9-hole gem, is a Braid as well. Makes playing it twice well worth it!

I have heard it's very good LP. Every Braid course that I've played has been a treat. The only time I was disappointed was on a course that he'd designed which was later substantially altered. When you stand on the tee, or in the middle of the fairway and you think "I know exactly what he's got in mind here", it's a good course. And when your good shots are rewarded and your bad shots are punished, then you know he transformed the vision into reality. That stretch on the Kings at Gleneagles from 10-18 is I think his best work.

I played at Stranraer last year, and that was outstanding too. It was the last course he designed, and it's a beauty. If there was ever a hidden gem, then that's it.

George1507 wrote:

LadyPutt wrote:We’re surrounded by Braid courses in my corner of Fife and I’m delighted that my home course, Lundin Ladies, even though it is a 9-hole gem, is a Braid as well. Makes playing it twice well worth it!

I have heard it's very good LP. Every Braid course that I've played has been a treat. The only time I was disappointed was on a course that he'd designed which was later substantially altered. When you stand on the tee, or in the middle of the fairway and you think "I know exactly what he's got in mind here", it's a good course. And when your good shots are rewarded and your bad shots are punished, then you know he transformed the vision into reality. That stretch on the Kings at Gleneagles from 10-18 is I think his best work.

I played at Stranraer last year, and that was outstanding too. It was the last course he designed, and it's a beauty. If there was ever a hidden gem, then that's it.

If you ever fancy a game and are in the area let me know. Guest rates are just £8!