Jump to content


Advanced Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

249 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Wow! I have a daughter doing 3rd year science at a prominent uni, a very high proportion was delivered online through 2020, their home exam requirements were not remotely in this security league.
  2. Nerdy me has enjoyed the challenges of the exams generated from both sides of the ditch. USGA closed book is the first 50 questions, all multiple choice, slanted more to testing knowledge of definitions and applying them to a range of situations. They are not asking for numbers/references, it's all about applying your knowledge successfully. The open book 50 questions also do not ask for rule numbers - but if you need to go searching in the book and you are not very familiar with rule numbers you are going to burn more time and put pressure on getting finished. R&A
  3. The camera appeared to be hand held (moving around a little) but I saw no violation, the ball did not seem to move and there was nothing that suggested the player touched the ball or improved the lie.
  4. To which I can only reply WTF. No response required!
  5. If the ball is touching anything defined as PA then there is no relief, it is that simple. Getting into putting green issues is unrelated and unhelpful discussion. If the ball is not touching the wall and not in the PA, then relief is available unless something other than the wall prevents a stroke being made.
  6. See Rule 14.2b(2). A ball marked and lifted under a rule that is put back into play by dropping it onto the required spot gets one stroke penalty. So the question's answer cannot be A.
  7. So why mention any penalties for player A? 3 of the 4 answers include penalties for A.
  8. Penalty is for dropping when required to replace.
  9. The question is what should the score for the hole have been. It is not how should the Committee rule. DQ (outside stableford etc) is not a score for the hole.
  10. I'm assessing the difference between where the ball lay and where the player played from. I don't see any examples in the rules or interpretations that decide serious breach by comparing where a ball was played from with where the ball could have been played from if some form of penalty relief had been employed.
  11. Yes, but 14.7 serious breach words appear to override the penalty in this special case. That is, Rule 14.7 and Cttee Proc 6C(9) directly contradict each other. One for RBs to decide. IMO, an excellent question.
  12. The complexity is a result of different policy objectives sitting behind a rule. The want to penalize bad behaviour but they want to encourage/not penalize caring for the course. This leads us to the combination we currently have in 8.2 and 8.3; just bad behaviour (eg improving your line) gets you penalty but bad behaviour combined with good behaviour gets you no penalty. So you may not like it, but there is a clear line drawn on that issue so it is not deficient IMO. But things become yet more complicated when you combine this with a player that is making a 16.4 lift/exploration of
  13. My accounting is like this: a. One stroke into PA b. There is no relief from the NPZ (17.1e(2)) c. Player has then played from a wrong place and it is serious breach (ball was impossible to reach with club), so player gets the general penalty (2SP), but the stroke does not count and any penalty solely incurred in playing that ball (the additional 17.1 penalty referred to on p.429 and the OOB penalty) therefore does not count d. Player then takes 17.1d correctly for 1SP (it is not a 17.2 issue because the stroke from the PA did not count) and makes 3 strokes to get ball into
  14. I don't believe the sentence you identify "clarifies" precisely when the original ball was first moved.
  • Create New...