Lift, clean and place "through the green"

[finleysg]

I had my first opportunity to be on a tournament Committee (capital C, as in God) this past weekend. Two-day four ball event, full field in both championship and net flights, rain in the forecast. We had to shorten the net event to one day because the golf course became unplayable on Saturday due to rain. It was a long weekend.

 

There was one bit on controversy on the Committee because we determined at the start of play on Saturday that we had to play lift, clean and place in the fairway (own fairway only), but on one hole we had to play LCP through the green. There was simply no way to accurately define the fairway on that hole due to persistent drainage problems over the years, and the entire hole was quite a mess.

 

An hour or so into the event, I hear a radio call asking for a ruling on this hole. Player bombs a crooked drive onto an adjoining hole, and the player asks if LCP applies. My feeling was we had to say yes. "Through the green" includes adjacent holes, and that's how we defined the local rule for the day. My point of view did not win out, however, and the local rule was enforced only for the (ill defined) boundaries of that hole.

 

I still think I'm right. If you play LCP through the green, that pretty much covers most of the golf course. Any opinion from more experienced Committee veterans?

[rogolf]

I had my first opportunity to be on a tournament Committee (capital C, as in God) this past weekend. Two-day four ball event, full field in both championship and net flights, rain in the forecast. We had to shorten the net event to one day because the golf course became unplayable on Saturday due to rain. It was a long weekend.

 

There was one bit on controversy on the Committee because we determined at the start of play on Saturday that we had to play lift, clean and place in the fairway (own fairway only), but on one hole we had to play LCP through the green. There was simply no way to accurately define the fairway on that hole due to persistent drainage problems over the years, and the entire hole was quite a mess.

 

An hour or so into the event, I hear a radio call asking for a ruling on this hole. Player bombs a crooked drive onto an adjoining hole, and the player asks if LCP applies. My feeling was we had to say yes. "Through the green" includes adjacent holes, and that's how we defined the local rule for the day. My point of view did not win out, however, and the local rule was enforced only for the (ill defined) boundaries of that hole.

 

I still think I'm right. If you play LCP through the green, that pretty much covers most of the golf course. Any opinion from more experienced Committee veterans?

 

LCP through the green is not an authorized local Rule. I think you could have stuck with the authorized version by deeming the "closely-mown area" on that particular hole to be the entire hole (or something like that). Or use the other authorized local Rule - lift, clean and replace (which means replace on the marked spot).

 

Committee members, particularly Rules officials, get used to "long days and weekends". The usual hours of work are dawn to dark thirty.

[finleysg]

I had my first opportunity to be on a tournament Committee (capital C, as in God) this past weekend. Two-day four ball event, full field in both championship and net flights, rain in the forecast. We had to shorten the net event to one day because the golf course became unplayable on Saturday due to rain. It was a long weekend.

 

There was one bit on controversy on the Committee because we determined at the start of play on Saturday that we had to play lift, clean and place in the fairway (own fairway only), but on one hole we had to play LCP through the green. There was simply no way to accurately define the fairway on that hole due to persistent drainage problems over the years, and the entire hole was quite a mess.

 

An hour or so into the event, I hear a radio call asking for a ruling on this hole. Player bombs a crooked drive onto an adjoining hole, and the player asks if LCP applies. My feeling was we had to say yes. "Through the green" includes adjacent holes, and that's how we defined the local rule for the day. My point of view did not win out, however, and the local rule was enforced only for the (ill defined) boundaries of that hole.

 

I still think I'm right. If you play LCP through the green, that pretty much covers most of the golf course. Any opinion from more experienced Committee veterans?

 

LCP through the green is not an authorized local Rule. I think you could have stuck with the authorized version by deeming the "closely-mown area" on that particular hole to be the entire hole (or something like that). Or use the other authorized local Rule - lift, clean and replace (which means replace on the marked spot).

 

Committee members, particularly Rules officials, get used to "long days and weekends". The usual hours of work are dawn to dark thirty.

 

Sorry, I was imprecise in my OP. We were using the mark, lift, clean, replace local rule.

 

So in the case of a hole where "closely-mown area" is impractical to define (this is not a pristine golf course -- we run events to support public golf), through the green is not really an option under the ROG? And on Sunday another hole became similarly borderline playable.

[rogolf]

I had my first opportunity to be on a tournament Committee (capital C, as in God) this past weekend. Two-day four ball event, full field in both championship and net flights, rain in the forecast. We had to shorten the net event to one day because the golf course became unplayable on Saturday due to rain. It was a long weekend.

 

There was one bit on controversy on the Committee because we determined at the start of play on Saturday that we had to play lift, clean and place in the fairway (own fairway only), but on one hole we had to play LCP through the green. There was simply no way to accurately define the fairway on that hole due to persistent drainage problems over the years, and the entire hole was quite a mess.

 

An hour or so into the event, I hear a radio call asking for a ruling on this hole. Player bombs a crooked drive onto an adjoining hole, and the player asks if LCP applies. My feeling was we had to say yes. "Through the green" includes adjacent holes, and that's how we defined the local rule for the day. My point of view did not win out, however, and the local rule was enforced only for the (ill defined) boundaries of that hole.

 

I still think I'm right. If you play LCP through the green, that pretty much covers most of the golf course. Any opinion from more experienced Committee veterans?

 

LCP through the green is not an authorized local Rule. I think you could have stuck with the authorized version by deeming the "closely-mown area" on that particular hole to be the entire hole (or something like that). Or use the other authorized local Rule - lift, clean and replace (which means replace on the marked spot).

 

Committee members, particularly Rules officials, get used to "long days and weekends". The usual hours of work are dawn to dark thirty.

 

Sorry, I was imprecise in my OP. We were using the mark, lift, clean, replace local rule.

 

So in the case of a hole where "closely-mown area" is impractical to define (this is not a pristine golf course -- we run events to support public golf), through the green is not really an option under the ROG? And on Sunday another hole became similarly borderline playable.

Through the green is an acceptable option for lift, clean and replace (on original spot), but not for lift, clean and place (on a different spot).

[Sawgrass]

I'm not at all sure that declaring LCR "through the green" on just one hole is valid.

 

Through the green is all areas of the course except hazards, teeing grounds and putting greens. I fear that once you declare LCR through the green on one hole, it's inherently true for all holes because all holes are on the course.

 

I have this vague recollection that you may not declare GUR on one hole to be TTG on another. Not sure, and for some reason (perhaps because I'm making it up!) I can't find it now. But if I am right about that, it seems to cast doubt on the original idea. If so, I'd suppose you'd have to ask a RB for a ruling.

 

(Anyone know if I'm daft about the GUR thing?)

[SNIPERBBB]

Local rules are made by fools. Another example of a LR that is nice in theory but nobody bothered to contemplate the rammifications with the way it was written.

[HitEmTrue]

I'm not at all sure that declaring LCR "through the green" on just one hole is valid.

 

 

c. Cleaning Ball

Conditions, such as extreme wetness causing significant amounts of mud to adhere to the ball, may be such that permission to lift, clean and replace the ball would be appropriate. In these circumstances, the following Local Rule is recommended:

 

"(Specify area, e.g., at the 6th hole, on a closely-mown area, anywhere through the green, etc.) a ball may be lifted and cleaned without penalty. The ball must be replaced.

[Sawgrass]

I'm not at all sure that declaring LCR "through the green" on just one hole is valid.

 

 

c. Cleaning Ball

Conditions, such as extreme wetness causing significant amounts of mud to adhere to the ball, may be such that permission to lift, clean and replace the ball would be appropriate. In these circumstances, the following Local Rule is recommended:

 

"(Specify area, e.g., at the 6th hole, on a closely-mown area, anywhere through the green, etc.) a ball may be lifted and cleaned without penalty. The ball must be replaced.

 

I'm saying that, perhaps, "at the 6th hole" is oppositional to Through the Green. I don't believe that this list of choices addresses that possibility, do you?

[HitEmTrue]

I'm not at all sure that declaring LCR "through the green" on just one hole is valid.

 

 

c. Cleaning Ball

Conditions, such as extreme wetness causing significant amounts of mud to adhere to the ball, may be such that permission to lift, clean and replace the ball would be appropriate. In these circumstances, the following Local Rule is recommended:

 

"(Specify area, e.g., at the 6th hole, on a closely-mown area, anywhere through the green, etc.) a ball may be lifted and cleaned without penalty. The ball must be replaced.

 

I'm saying that, perhaps, "at the 6th hole" is oppositional to Through the Green. I don't believe that this list of choices addresses that possibility, do you?

 

Those are examples..."through the green while playing the 6th hole" doesn't collide with those examples in my mind.

[Sawgrass]

I'm not at all sure that declaring LCR "through the green" on just one hole is valid.

 

 

c. Cleaning Ball

Conditions, such as extreme wetness causing significant amounts of mud to adhere to the ball, may be such that permission to lift, clean and replace the ball would be appropriate. In these circumstances, the following Local Rule is recommended:

 

"(Specify area, e.g., at the 6th hole, on a closely-mown area, anywhere through the green, etc.) a ball may be lifted and cleaned without penalty. The ball must be replaced.

 

I'm saying that, perhaps, "at the 6th hole" is oppositional to Through the Green. I don't believe that this list of choices addresses that possibility, do you?

 

Those are examples..."through the green while playing the 6th hole" doesn't collide with those examples in my mind.

 

I'm still not sure, but since I opened up the prospect of my being daft, I shouldn't be taken too seriously.

[finleysg]

I felt that "through the green" while playing the 3rd hole was narrow enough so that the players didn't need to get into discussions (or arguments) about what constituted the fairway on that hole. It worked out ok in the end, but it's a difficult situation because even without the weekend rain, that hole is as rough as they get. The green on that hole is really good, though, so it has that going for it.

 

I can see potential confusion regardless of what we did. We all know what we mean when we say "the third hole", but when you get out there you see that absent a clearly defined fairway, there are definitely places where a player could end up and not know if he was on #3 or on #4 or #17.

 

It is definitely an eye opener, going from a player/complainer to being responsible for the entire field and the integrity of the tournament.

[QEight]

Does Local Rule for LCR/LCP actually allow limiting it to "closely mown" grass on current hole only? I would not like such a rule at all. Why penalize twice for errant shot?

[Newby]

The two authorised LRs mention specify a more restricted area and Specify area respectively, and give examples. This gives the committee carte blanche to pick whatever they feel relevant to meet the problem.

[Newby]

I'm not at all sure that declaring LCR "through the green" on just one hole is valid.

 

Through the green is all areas of the course except hazards, teeing grounds and putting greens. I fear that once you declare LCR through the green on one hole, it's inherently true for all holes because all holes are on the course.

 

I have this vague recollection that you may not declare GUR on one hole to be TTG on another. Not sure, and for some reason (perhaps because I'm making it up!) I can't find it now. But if I am right about that, it seems to cast doubt on the original idea. If so, I'd suppose you'd have to ask a RB for a ruling.

 

(Anyone know if I'm daft about the GUR thing?)

 

33-8/23 Local Rule Denying Relief from Ground Under Repair During Play of Particular Hole

 

Q.An area of ground under repair is situated on the fairway of the 2nd hole, which is parallel to the 1st hole. Is it permissible to make a Local Rule prohibiting relief from this ground under repair during the play of the 1st hole?

 

A.No.

[Sawgrass]

The two authorised LRs mention specify a more restricted area and Specify area respectively, and give examples. This gives the committee carte blanche to pick whatever they feel relevant to meet the problem.

 

First, thank you for finding that Decision and implicitly suggesting that I am not, indeed, daft.

 

But next, while I agree with the above, I don't believe that this addresses whether you can declare LCR "through the green" on hole #6 and have that not also inherently apply to all holes on the course (as they all share one big TTG).

 

The Decision you found supports this theory, though of course it's not definitive in the particular case of LCR.

 

Once again, I am certain that I'm not certain.

[Newby]

I knew I had something somewhere. I have just found this from the R&A dated 2010 (for which I have permission to repost).

 

It has been our position that it is permissible to limit the operation of the Local Rule for preferred lies to certain areas, e.g. specific fairways or the fairway of the hole being played.

[Sawgrass]

I knew I had something somewhere. I have just found this from the R&A dated 2010 (for which I have permission to repost).

 

It has been our position that it is permissible to limit the operation of the Local Rule for preferred lies to certain areas, e.g. specific fairways or the fairway of the hole being played.

 

Agreed. But there is no Through the Green area limited to a specific hole, is there? And if there was, where would it end?

[QEight]

The two authorised LRs mention specify a more restricted area and Specify area respectively, and give examples. This gives the committee carte blanche to pick whatever they feel relevant to meet the problem.

 

I understand this if having soft fairway on one hole. But having LCR on whole course but allowing it to be used on own fairway only seems unnecessary.

[rogolf]

The two authorised LRs mention specify a more restricted area and Specify area respectively, and give examples. This gives the committee carte blanche to pick whatever they feel relevant to meet the problem.

The authorized local Rule for lift, clean and place is very specific to closely-mown areas. There is no authority from the ruling bodies to go beyond closely-mown for lift, clean and place. I realize the PGA Tour did through the green once (maybe more), but they are not a ruling body and probably did not check with the USGA for authorization in that instance.

[Augster]

I knew I had something somewhere. I have just found this from the R&A dated 2010 (for which I have permission to repost).

 

It has been our position that it is permissible to limit the operation of the Local Rule for preferred lies to certain areas, e.g. specific fairways or the fairway of the hole being played.

 

Agreed. But there is no Through the Green area limited to a specific hole, is there? And if there was, where would it end?

 

It would end when the player is done playing that hole. When his ball is holed.

 

In the example in the rules, it's "during play of the 6th hole". So when the player finishes 6, and tees on 7 and snap hooks it back into the 6th fairway, he is no longer allowed LCR, as he is no longer playing the 6th hole. His ball lies ON the 6th hole, but he is not playing the 6th hole. He has already holed out.

 

Maybe you are daft after-all. :)

 

To the OP, I got an earful today from one of your competitors this weekend about the conditions. Incredibly tough conditions to try to hold anything besides a scramble.

 

I'd be willing to bet that the only rounds of golf played in the metro on Saturday were at your event. Nobody else would willingly play in that. Every course I drove by Saturday had zero play on it.

 

What a miserable May day.

 

 

[Newby]

The two authorised LRs mention specify a more restricted area and Specify area respectively, and give examples. This gives the committee carte blanche to pick whatever they feel relevant to meet the problem.

The authorized local Rule for lift, clean and place is very specific to closely-mown areas. There is no authority from the ruling bodies to go beyond closely-mown for lift, clean and place. I realize the PGA Tour did through the green once (maybe more), but they are not a ruling body and probably did not check with the USGA for authorization in that instance.

 

The PGA were doing it some few years ago but ceased. However they started again in 2015 and when I queried it, I got this response from the R&A

 

It is permissible, if conditions are such that it is warranted, to extend preferred lies to through the green – we have grown more relaxed in this area in recent years. That said, and I cannot stress this strongly enough, obviously this should be used sparingly and only where absolutely necessary, e.g. to facilitate play in the winter. If a course is having to do this at other times of the year there is probably an agronomy/course maintenance problem.

[finleysg]

I knew I had something somewhere. I have just found this from the R&A dated 2010 (for which I have permission to repost).

 

It has been our position that it is permissible to limit the operation of the Local Rule for preferred lies to certain areas, e.g. specific fairways or the fairway of the hole being played.

 

Agreed. But there is no Through the Green area limited to a specific hole, is there? And if there was, where would it end?

 

It would end when the player is done playing that hole. When his ball is holed.

 

In the example in the rules, it's "during play of the 6th hole". So when the player finishes 6, and tees on 7 and snap hooks it back into the 6th fairway, he is no longer allowed LCR, as he is no longer playing the 6th hole. His ball lies ON the 6th hole, but he is not playing the 6th hole. He has already holed out.

 

Maybe you are daft after-all. :)

 

To the OP, I got an earful today from one of your competitors this weekend about the conditions. Incredibly tough conditions to try to hold anything besides a scramble.

 

I'd be willing to bet that the only rounds of golf played in the metro on Saturday were at your event. Nobody else would willingly play in that. Every course I drove by Saturday had zero play on it.

 

What a miserable May day.

 

Yes, it was tough. The truly surprising thing is that, out of 216 players, we had only one team (two players) withdraw. Nobody signed up for the event expecting the host course to be anything other than what it was, and most understand that rescheduling is not really an option. I played in the mid-publinks several years ago that was a total washout, and all we could get from the host course that time was to play a single round event in mid-October. That must have been quite a nightmare for the committee.

[Sawgrass]

I knew I had something somewhere. I have just found this from the R&A dated 2010 (for which I have permission to repost).

 

It has been our position that it is permissible to limit the operation of the Local Rule for preferred lies to certain areas, e.g. specific fairways or the fairway of the hole being played.

 

Agreed. But there is no Through the Green area limited to a specific hole, is there? And if there was, where would it end?

 

It would end when the player is done playing that hole. When his ball is holed.

 

In the example in the rules, it's "during play of the 6th hole". So when the player finishes 6, and tees on 7 and snap hooks it back into the 6th fairway, he is no longer allowed LCR, as he is no longer playing the 6th hole. His ball lies ON the 6th hole, but he is not playing the 6th hole. He has already holed out.

 

Maybe you are daft after-all. :)

 

To the OP, I got an earful today from one of your competitors this weekend about the conditions. Incredibly tough conditions to try to hold anything besides a scramble.

 

I'd be willing to bet that the only rounds of golf played in the metro on Saturday were at your event. Nobody else would willingly play in that. Every course I drove by Saturday had zero play on it.

 

What a miserable May day.

 

Okay, since I've got you to come this far, why does D 33-8/23 prohibit an abnormal ground condition (like LCR addresses) from having a Local Rule (like LCR) apply differently when playing different holes (like we're discussing)? And why wouldn't that prohibition extend to this Local Rule?

[HitEmTrue]

Okay, since I've got you to come this far, why does D 33-8/23 prohibit an abnormal ground condition (like LCR addresses) from having a Local Rule (like LCR) apply differently when playing different holes (like we're discussing)? And why wouldn't that prohibition extend to this Local Rule?

 

Its a more pragmatic solution?

 

GUR is a specific area that should be marked.

 

LCR rule can vary from day-to-day. Rather that having to mark a white line around the area didn't recover well from the deluge of rain we got the other day, implement the rule for playing that hole.

 

Are you saying that you don't believe the language in Appendix I 3 ( c) should exist? Or are you disagreeing with my interpretation of how it should be applied?

[Sawgrass]

Okay, since I've got you to come this far, why does D 33-8/23 prohibit an abnormal ground condition (like LCR addresses) from having a Local Rule (like LCR) apply differently when playing different holes (like we're discussing)? And why wouldn't that prohibition extend to this Local Rule?

 

Its a more pragmatic solution?

 

GUR is a specific area that should be marked.

 

LCR rule can vary from day-to-day. Rather that having to mark a white line around the area didn't recover well from the deluge of rain we got the other day, implement the rule for playing that hole.

 

Are you saying that you don't believe the language in Appendix I 3 ( c) should exist? Or are you disagreeing with my interpretation of how it should be applied?

 

I recognize your point. I don't wish any language out of existence. And if it is permissible for LCR TTG to be implemented for one hole only, I could easily live with that and play by it accurately.

 

My sole point is that it's possible that the implications of D 33-8/23 prohibit us from identifying an area that you get relief from when playing one hole and not another. If it were up to me I'd allow it for LCR, but to me the existing language doesn't indicate that it's acceptable, and as the OP indicates, the lack of clarity promotes confusion.

[HitEmTrue]

I recognize your point. I don't wish any language out of existence. And if it is permissible for LCR TTG to be implemented for one hole only, I could easily live with that and play by it accurately.

 

My sole point is that it's possible that the implications of D 33-8/23 prohibit us from identifying an area that you get relief from when playing one hole and not another. If it were up to me I'd allow it for LCR, but to me the existing language doesn't indicate that it's acceptable, and as the OP indicates, the lack of clarity promotes confusion.

 

Is your objection that "through the green" and "while playing the 6th hole" cannot mix? Like oil and water?

 

Let's say the following local rule is implemented:

 

"While playing the 6th hole a ball may be lifted and cleaned without penalty. The ball must be replaced."

 

What exactly would that mean?

 

The only option while listing a specific hole would be to say in a closely-mown area? Why put the comma after "6th hole," and the word "etc" in the following language?

 

"(Specify area, e.g., at the 6th hole, on a closely-mown area, anywhere through the green, etc.) a ball may be lifted and cleaned without penalty. The ball must be replaced."

 

< edit >

I may have exceeded my quota for question marks. What do you think? hehe

[Sawgrass]

I recognize your point. I don't wish any language out of existence. And if it is permissible for LCR TTG to be implemented for one hole only, I could easily live with that and play by it accurately.

 

My sole point is that it's possible that the implications of D 33-8/23 prohibit us from identifying an area that you get relief from when playing one hole and not another. If it were up to me I'd allow it for LCR, but to me the existing language doesn't indicate that it's acceptable, and as the OP indicates, the lack of clarity promotes confusion.

 

Is your objection that "through the green" and "while playing the 6th hole" cannot mix? Like oil and water?

 

Let's say the following local rule is implemented:

 

"While playing the 6th hole a ball may be lifted and cleaned without penalty. The ball must be replaced."

 

What exactly would that mean?

 

The only option while listing a specific hole would be to say in a closely-mown area? Why put the comma after "6th hole," and the word "etc" in the following language?

 

"(Specify area, e.g., at the 6th hole, on a closely-mown area, anywhere through the green, etc.) a ball may be lifted and cleaned without penalty. The ball must be replaced."

 

< edit >

I may have exceeded my quota for question marks. What do you think? hehe

 

I'll try to communicate my point again, though I seriously consider my point a bit boring, so apologies to anyone, including you, who may be reading.

 

IMO "TTG" is a location, in a way a huge "spot" if you will, and "While playing the Sixth" is instead an activity. I'm sure we both agree that marked GUR on the sixth hole provides free relief which can not be excluded when playing the seventh hole. It's the spot that creates the relief grant, and Committees are not allowed to associate that with a restriction regarding the hole being played -- not even a LR can't change that.

 

What I don't know, and I express this ignorance with complete certainty, is whether a LR can switch that up when it comes to LCP. It's possible it can, I'd be just fine with it if that's in fact legal, but it might not be.

[HitEmTrue]

I'll try to communicate my point again, though I seriously consider my point a bit boring, so apologies to anyone, including you, who may be reading.

 

IMO "TTG" is a location, in a way a huge "spot" if you will, and "While playing the Sixth" is instead an activity. I'm sure we both agree that marked GUR on the sixth hole provides free relief which can not be excluded when playing the seventh hole. It's the spot that creates the relief grant, and Committees are not allowed to associate that with a restriction regarding the hole being played -- not even a LR can't change that.

 

What I don't know, and I express this ignorance with complete certainty, is whether a LR can switch that up when it comes to LCP. It's possible it can, I'd be just fine with it if that's in fact legal, but it might not be.

 

The Appendix sentence that I've quoted makes it clear (to me) that LR for LCR may be applied to a specific hole...through the green or closely mown areas. But now you've brought it back to LCP, and I don't know.

[Sawgrass]

I'll try to communicate my point again, though I seriously consider my point a bit boring, so apologies to anyone, including you, who may be reading.

 

IMO "TTG" is a location, in a way a huge "spot" if you will, and "While playing the Sixth" is instead an activity. I'm sure we both agree that marked GUR on the sixth hole provides free relief which can not be excluded when playing the seventh hole. It's the spot that creates the relief grant, and Committees are not allowed to associate that with a restriction regarding the hole being played -- not even a LR can't change that.

 

What I don't know, and I express this ignorance with complete certainty, is whether a LR can switch that up when it comes to LCP. It's possible it can, I'd be just fine with it if that's in fact legal, but it might not be.

 

The Appendix sentence that I've quoted makes it clear (to me) that LR for LCR may be applied to a specific hole...through the green or closely mown areas. But now you've brought it back to LCP, and I don't know.

 

Sorry, I meant to say LCR and inadvertently said LCP. Here's the LCR wording:

 

Cleaning Ball

 

Conditions, such as extreme wetness causing significant amounts of mud to adhere to the ball, may be such that permission to lift, clean and replace the ball would be appropriate. In these circumstances, the following Local Rule is recommended:

 

"(Specify area, e.g., at the 6th hole, on a closely-mown area, anywhere through the green, etc.) a ball may be lifted and cleaned without penalty. The ball must be replaced.

I read that as saying you may declare LCR "anywhere through the green" or at a particular hole or on a closely-mown area. But the option is for "anywhere" through the green. That in a way suggests that TTG is a robust amount of space covering most of the course, and it doesn't suggest (to me) that you can declare LCR on a particular hole and TTG.

[Newby]

NB. It does say e.g. ie they are only examples not specifics. Nor does it mention anywhere you can't (within the confines of TTG).