2019 Rules of Golf

[Augster]

I've got a question. I think a few of my fellow players will empathize.

 

I think the rules changes for 2019 are the worst. Seems to me pace has taken a front seat to the traditions and integrity of the game.

 

So, if I play as if there are no rules changes will I be in violation of any of the new rules?

 

In day to day play, not very often. It’s the agreement to not play by the new rules that gets you the DQ.

 

But in everyday play, it’s basically just drops that have changed. You have to drop from knee height.

 

If you make that one change, dropping from knee height, and play golf the way you always have, you’ll have legit scores 99+% of the time.

 

But that’s for you. Your opponents/competitors must be allowed to play the game by the new rules. So while you won’t be tapping down spike marks or moving sticks out of your way in penalty areas, your opponents will have that option.

 

Really though, if you just hit it down the fairway and hit it on the green then two putt and go to the next hole, you’ll never notice the rules changes.

 

The changes are for the rest of us hacks that hit it sideways most of the time. Moving stuff in penalty areas, knee height drops, and 2ps lost ball local rule will be used in nearly every round to make playing easier and faster.

 

The spike mark rule was put in place because, universally, nobody likes to put through them. So instead of looking at it for 10+ seconds and developing a strategy as to how it’ll affect the putt, you just tap it down. It’s faster.

 

Putting with the flagstick in is a concession to players playing as a 1-some or 2-some that want to have a legit score, but don’t want to pull the flag on long putts. It’s saves time and wear on the green.

 

But, for the most part, you can play golf the same way you always have if that’s what you’d like to do. Just drop from knee height. It’s the only, real, “major change” they came up with that may affect you.

[Mr. Bean]

Is there not some confusion here between the reference point and the relief area? The reference point for back on the line relief is wherever on the line from the hole through the point where the ball last crossed the edge of the penalty area you decide it is to be. That is to say, the reference point is not on the edge of the PA but wherever you choose back on that line. Rogolf is looking for anything which says that you cannot choose a reference point inside the penalty area. I can't find anything either and if that is the case then it is possible to have a relief area which is partly in the penalty area and partly outside it and to drop in and play from the latter part.

 

Still looking!

 

The way I read the Rule is that no part of the relief area may be in the penalty area. Thus it is impossible to have the reference point in the penalty area but it has to be outside of it.

 

I cannot see why RB's would have changed this from current Rules. Can You, Colin?

[Sawgrass]

I refer to 17.1d (2) and (3), under "limits on location of relief area" in each.

Those discuss the location of the relief area (cannot be in the same penalty area), but only specify that the reference point must be "on the course".

Think of no. 12 at Augusta, marked yellow. If the ball last crosses the edge of the penalty area on the green side and the reference point can be immediately behind that point (on the back-on-th-line), there could well be some of the one club-length relief area outside the penalty area and the player could drop on the green side of the penalty area. Spieth would love it!

I think I see what you mean, sounds like an oversight to me!

[Mr. Bean]

I would certainly think that for a round ball to be resting against the flagstick it would almost certainly need to have a portion below the edge of the hole unless the flagstick was leaning dramatically from being replaced very poorly. The ball would need to be actually short of the hole with the last dimple on the edge for it to both to be against the stick and not have a portion below the edge of the hole..

 

I agree completely. IMO it is more than unlikely to have any kind of debate of this issue on the course.

[Sawgrass]

Is there not some confusion here between the reference point and the relief area? The reference point for back on the line relief is wherever on the line from the hole through the point where the ball last crossed the edge of the penalty area you decide it is to be. That is to say, the reference point is not on the edge of the PA but wherever you choose back on that line. Rogolf is looking for anything which says that you cannot choose a reference point inside the penalty area. I can't find anything either and if that is the case then it is possible to have a relief area which is partly in the penalty area and partly outside it and to drop in and play from the latter part.

 

Still looking!

 

The way I read the Rule is that no part of the relief area may be in the penalty area. Thus it is impossible to have the reference point in the penalty area but it has to be outside of it.

 

I cannot see why RB's would have changed this from current Rules. Can You, Colin?

While a part of what would otherwise be the relief area might be in the same penalty area, and thereby excluded from being a valid part of the relief area, that does not mean that a remaining part of the relief area outside the penalty area isn't valid. See 17.1d (3)/1 as an example of that thinking.

[Halebopp]

I came across this, it doesn't settle the reference point issue but answers the question of measuring across the penalty area.

 

Edit: Unless, of course, this Interpretation is strictly limited to lateral relief and can not be extrapolated to concern line back-on-line relief option.

 

 

17.1d(3)/1 – Player May Measure Across Penalty Area In Taking Lateral Relief

 

In taking lateral relief where the ball last crossed the edge of a narrow red penalty area, it may be possible for the player to measure the two clublengths from the reference point across the penalty area in determining the size of the relief area. However, any part of the penalty area within the two club-lengths as measured from the reference point is not part of the relief area.

[Shilgy]

I've got a question. I think a few of my fellow players will empathize.

 

I think the rules changes for 2019 are the worst. Seems to me pace has taken a front seat to the traditions and integrity of the game.

 

So, if I play as if there are no rules changes will I be in violation of any of the new rules?

As long as you limit your search time to 3 minutes, don't take a drop, don't replace a ball moved by natural forces after having been marked on the putting green, don't replace a broken club from your original 14, you'll be just fine -- other than you may be scoring yourself higher than you'd be entitled to for things like hitting yourself with your ball.

 

Good luck with that!

Bolded part? If he doesn't replace the ball that moved he IS in violation in 2019? Currently you don't replace it.

[Matt J]

I've got a question. I think a few of my fellow players will empathize.

 

I think the rules changes for 2019 are the worst. Seems to me pace has taken a front seat to the traditions and integrity of the game.

 

So, if I play as if there are no rules changes will I be in violation of any of the new rules?

 

In day to day play, not very often. It's the agreement to not play by the new rules that gets you the DQ.

 

But in everyday play, it's basically just drops that have changed. You have to drop from knee height.

 

If you make that one change, dropping from knee height, and play golf the way you always have, you'll have legit scores 99+% of the time.

 

But that's for you. Your opponents/competitors must be allowed to play the game by the new rules. So while you won't be tapping down spike marks or moving sticks out of your way in penalty areas, your opponents will have that option.

 

Really though, if you just hit it down the fairway and hit it on the green then two putt and go to the next hole, you'll never notice the rules changes.

 

The changes are for the rest of us hacks that hit it sideways most of the time. Moving stuff in penalty areas, knee height drops, and 2ps lost ball local rule will be used in nearly every round to make playing easier and faster.

 

The spike mark rule was put in place because, universally, nobody likes to put through them. So instead of looking at it for 10+ seconds and developing a strategy as to how it'll affect the putt, you just tap it down. It's faster.

 

Putting with the flagstick in is a concession to players playing as a 1-some or 2-some that want to have a legit score, but don't want to pull the flag on long putts. It's saves time and wear on the green.

 

But, for the most part, you can play golf the same way you always have if that's what you'd like to do. Just drop from knee height. It's the only, real, "major change" they came up with that may affect you.

 

I play a friendly match play with a partner pretty often and we played yesterday. I took a drop for a ball hit into a water hazard and took it at shoulder height. I contemplated whether the rule is from "knee height or higher" or actually just at knee height. Re-reading the new rule it is clear (even has a diagram) that the ball must be dropped exactly from knee height.

 

Seems that and figuring out the "relief area" are the two big components of complying with the 2019 rules. I'm not going to address the idea that "not complying" is a rules violation. If every player had to pass a rules test before teeing off, golf wouldn't have to worry about "dying" as it would be cold and decaying already. Denial plausibility, I'm not willfully ignoring the rules I'm just ignorant to all the facets of the new ridiculous fix what isn't broken bureaucrats keeping their jobs ivory tower rules changes for 2019.

[Sawgrass]

I've got a question. I think a few of my fellow players will empathize.

 

I think the rules changes for 2019 are the worst. Seems to me pace has taken a front seat to the traditions and integrity of the game.

 

So, if I play as if there are no rules changes will I be in violation of any of the new rules?

As long as you limit your search time to 3 minutes, don't take a drop, don't replace a ball moved by natural forces after having been marked on the putting green, don't replace a broken club from your original 14, you'll be just fine -- other than you may be scoring yourself higher than you'd be entitled to for things like hitting yourself with your ball.

 

Good luck with that!

Bolded part? If he doesn't replace the ball that moved he IS in violation in 2019? Currently you don't replace it.

Thank you, I wrote that bolded part incorrectly, I'll fix it in my original.

[Mr. Bean]

While a part of what would otherwise be the relief area might be in the same penalty area, and thereby excluded from being a valid part of the relief area, that does not mean that a remaining part of the relief area outside the penalty area isn't valid. See 17.1d (3)/1 as an example of that thinking.

 

This is indeed an interesting question and obviously one of the many parts of the new Rules written unclear.

 

My questions are:

- may a reference point be on the same penalty area? IMO no as it is not possible today either.

- may part of the relief area be on the same penalty area?.

- does R17.1d(3)/1 only apply to lateral penalty areas?

[Newby]

I read all these changes when they were first announced, but I have to admit that now I've forgotten what many of the changes were.

 

They eleiminated the lateral option for a red staked hazard unless a local rule is implemented?

 

And I apologize for asking here instead of looking it up, when it's been covered extensively already. I just don't remeber and it's easier to get answers here (just wanted to throw that out there before the "use the search function" snipes start coming).

 

See posts 127,8 & 9

[Sawgrass]

 

Seems that and figuring out the "relief area" are the two big components of complying with the 2019 rules. I'm not going to address the idea that "not complying" is a rules violation. If every player had to pass a rules test before teeing off, golf wouldn't have to worry about "dying" as it would be cold and decaying already. Denial plausibility, I'm not willfully ignoring the rules I'm just ignorant to all the facets of the new ridiculous fix what isn't broken bureaucrats keeping their jobs ivory tower rules changes for 2019.

 

Yes, people don't like change.

 

But let me hazard a guess that if you are currently "ignorant to all the facts" of the new relief area changes, you were also previously ignorant of all the facts regarding when a ball had to be re-dropped under previous rule 20-2c. Things are easier to deal with now, thanks to the "bureaucrats" who generously bothered to reconsider virtually everything despite no one demanding that they do so.

[davep043]

Seems that and figuring out the "relief area" are the two big components of complying with the 2019 rules. I'm not going to address the idea that "not complying" is a rules violation. If every player had to pass a rules test before teeing off, golf wouldn't have to worry about "dying" as it would be cold and decaying already. Denial plausibility, I'm not willfully ignoring the rules I'm just ignorant to all the facets of the new ridiculous fix what isn't broken bureaucrats keeping their jobs ivory tower rules changes for 2019.

 

Yes, people don't like change.

 

But let me hazard a guess that if you are currently "ignorant to all the facts" of the new relief area changes, you were also previously ignorant of all the facts regarding when a ball had to be re-dropped under previous rule 20-2c. Things are easier to deal with now, thanks to the "bureaucrats" who generously bothered to reconsider virtually everything despite no one demanding that they do so.

Well said. For many of us, the Rules of Golf seemed to work reasonably well, yet the "ivory-tower" guys took it upon themselves to really review all facets. I agree that the 2019 Rules will be easier to use, have been written in much simpler and clearer language, benefit greatly from having illustrations included, and as such represent an improvement over the previous versions. Those same ivory tower guys asked for input from us, the lowly masses, and seemed to actually listen to our responses, as a number of the rules changed between the initial review version and the final version. I'm not in favor of every change, but I think that overall the 2019 Rules are an improvement. Sadly, all change requires a little effort from the masses to learn and to adjust, this is no exception.

[mneumann]

There was some discussion earlier in this thread about attending the flagstick and then leaving it in at the command of the person putting and whether that constitutes a penalty.

 

It got me thinking ..... is there any point in attending the flagstick under the new rule? The purpose of attending it is to prevent the person putting from incurring a penalty. But with no more penalty, is there any point in even doing it anymore?

 

This was my thinking as well even coming from the perspective that I will still be pulling the flag to putt.

 

If I'm too far away to see it, no one needs to attend, I'm not trying to make it and it won't affect me in any way if the flag is left in or removed after I putt. Being able to putt without the flagstick attended seems to be one of the ways to decrease pace of play.

[fairways4life]

While a part of what would otherwise be the relief area might be in the same penalty area, and thereby excluded from being a valid part of the relief area, that does not mean that a remaining part of the relief area outside the penalty area isn't valid. See 17.1d (3)/1 as an example of that thinking.

 

This is indeed an interesting question and obviously one of the many parts of the new Rules written unclear.

 

My questions are:

- may a reference point be on the same penalty area? IMO no as it is not possible today either.

- may part of the relief area be on the same penalty area?.

- does R17.1d(3)/1 only apply to lateral penalty areas?

 

Is the term "reference point" new for the 2019 rules? Or do the current rules also use "reference point" when describing straight-line-through drops? If "reference point" is in fact already a thing (and is currently forbidden inside the yellow/red lines) then I can see you being correct based on that.

 

But currently, it's only the actual drop (the relief point) that may not take place inside the yellow/red lines. The reference point is a different (albeit closely related) thing.

 

Your point in post #152 about no part of the relief area being allowed inside the penalty area is a valid one. If one club-length gets you out of the penalty area but the grip portion of the club is still inside the penalty area, would that negate the entire rest of the relief area that you've established?

 

If we were talking about #12 at Augusta, it may not make a huge difference as it would still just be a little flip wedge if you just dropped on the original side of the water. But what if it was a large lake that was 180 yards to carry? Dropping on the original side would require a 180+ shot while dropping on the "other side" could be just a little pitch or chip. Under the right circumstances, this could mean a huge advantage.

 

Certainly the governing bodies must have discussed this possibility when they wrote in the new one-club length tweak.

[Mr. Bean]

This is indeed an interesting question and obviously one of the many parts of the new Rules written unclear.

 

My questions are:

- may a reference point be on the same penalty area? IMO no as it is not possible today either.

- may part of the relief area be on the same penalty area?.

- does R17.1d(3)/1 only apply to lateral penalty areas?

 

Is the term "reference point" new for the 2019 rules? Or do the current rules also use "reference point" when describing straight-line-through drops? If "reference point" is in fact already a thing (and is currently forbidden inside the yellow/red lines) then I can see you being correct based on that.

 

 

Even though in current Rules there is no such thing as a reference point, a ball must be dropped behind the yellow-marked water hazard so there is absolutely no ambiguity about that. As I cannot believe this principle would have changed the new Rules are just poorly written in this respect.

 

Furthermore, as the yellow penalty areas have been preserved the current principle of having to hit a ball over a yellow penalty area (currently water hazard) instead of carrying it must still prevail. Thus it does not sound at all logical to drop a ball on the green side of Augusta #12 in described situation.

[fairways4life]

This is indeed an interesting question and obviously one of the many parts of the new Rules written unclear.

 

My questions are:

- may a reference point be on the same penalty area? IMO no as it is not possible today either.

- may part of the relief area be on the same penalty area?.

- does R17.1d(3)/1 only apply to lateral penalty areas?

 

Is the term "reference point" new for the 2019 rules? Or do the current rules also use "reference point" when describing straight-line-through drops? If "reference point" is in fact already a thing (and is currently forbidden inside the yellow/red lines) then I can see you being correct based on that.

 

 

Even though in current Rules there is no such thing as a reference point, a ball must be dropped behind the yellow-marked water hazard so there is absolutely no ambiguity about that. As I cannot believe this principle would have changed the new Rules are just poorly written in this respect.

 

Furthermore, as the yellow penalty areas have been preserved the current principle of having to hit a ball over a yellow penalty area (currently water hazard) instead of carrying it must still prevail. Thus it does not sound at all logical to drop a ball on the green side of Augusta #12 in described situation.

 

I agree with everything you've said 100%. And I agree that logically speaking, you wouldn't be able to do this because it would negate the entire point of not offering lateral relief for yellow penalty areas. But because of the way the new rule is written by the book, I can see how this could potentially be exploited as a loophole.

 

I'm surprised that there isn't any language in the new rule about the reference point having to be outside of the penalty area (unless there is and we still just aren't seeing it). They had to have thought of this when they drafted the rule.

 

Now, let's consider a situation where the one-club length rule can in fact allow you to take what is essentially lateral relief from a yellow penalty area...

 

Using the same #12 at Augusta example, let's say you are able to find a straight-line reference point OUTSIDE the yellow line on the "other side" of the body of water, but the area is heavily sloped and crappy, muddy turf and is just not a great place to play a shot from. Under the "old" rule, you would have said "screw it I'm dropping back on the other side where it's nice and flat and has good turf." But under the 2019 rule, you could use your driver as your one club and find a spot within one club length of that spot that is flatter and drier and a much better place to play a shot from. And that area is not closer to the hole. (Again, it would take the right mix of hole location + point of entry + shape of yellow lines for this to come into play. But I think you could find some situations where it could come into play).

[davep043]

This is indeed an interesting question and obviously one of the many parts of the new Rules written unclear.

 

My questions are:

- may a reference point be on the same penalty area? IMO no as it is not possible today either.

- may part of the relief area be on the same penalty area?.

- does R17.1d(3)/1 only apply to lateral penalty areas?

 

Is the term "reference point" new for the 2019 rules? Or do the current rules also use "reference point" when describing straight-line-through drops? If "reference point" is in fact already a thing (and is currently forbidden inside the yellow/red lines) then I can see you being correct based on that.

 

Even though in current Rules there is no such thing as a reference point, a ball must be dropped behind the yellow-marked water hazard so there is absolutely no ambiguity about that. As I cannot believe this principle would have changed the new Rules are just poorly written in this respect.

 

Furthermore, as the yellow penalty areas have been preserved the current principle of having to hit a ball over a yellow penalty area (currently water hazard) instead of carrying it must still prevail. Thus it does not sound at all logical to drop a ball on the green side of Augusta #12 in described situation.

I can envision a situation in which a ball enters a yellow penalty area (or hazard) on the green side. If the penalty area (hazard) curves significantly, there could be a location on the green side of the penalty area which keeps the entry point between you and the hole. This would be a legitimate drop location under either set of rules for a yellow hazard. I don't think the introduction of the "reference point" changes this possibility. I've added a picture of a hole from my course showing this potential situation. The hazard in front of the green is marked as yellow hazard until you get past the cart path bridge..

 

And to answer a comment from the previous post, the rules specifically say the reference point "may be in any area of the course except the same penalty area."

[fairways4life]

This is indeed an interesting question and obviously one of the many parts of the new Rules written unclear.

 

My questions are:

- may a reference point be on the same penalty area? IMO no as it is not possible today either.

- may part of the relief area be on the same penalty area?.

- does R17.1d(3)/1 only apply to lateral penalty areas?

 

Is the term "reference point" new for the 2019 rules? Or do the current rules also use "reference point" when describing straight-line-through drops? If "reference point" is in fact already a thing (and is currently forbidden inside the yellow/red lines) then I can see you being correct based on that.

 

Even though in current Rules there is no such thing as a reference point, a ball must be dropped behind the yellow-marked water hazard so there is absolutely no ambiguity about that. As I cannot believe this principle would have changed the new Rules are just poorly written in this respect.

 

Furthermore, as the yellow penalty areas have been preserved the current principle of having to hit a ball over a yellow penalty area (currently water hazard) instead of carrying it must still prevail. Thus it does not sound at all logical to drop a ball on the green side of Augusta #12 in described situation.

I can envision a situation in which a ball enters a yellow penalty area (or hazard) on the green side. If the penalty area (hazard) curves significantly, there could be a location on the green side of the penalty area which keeps the entry point between you and the hole. This would be a legitimate drop location under either set of rules for a yellow hazard. I don't think the introduction of the "reference point" changes this possibility. I've added a picture of a hole from my course showing this potential situation. The hazard in front of the green is marked as yellow hazard until you get past the cart path bridge..

 

And to answer a comment from the previous post, the rules specifically say the reference point "may be in any area of the course except the same penalty area."

 

You are correct that in some situations, a legitimate drop could be made under either set of rules.

 

But using your diagram above, what if the point of entry was very close to the side of the penalty area (like the edge of that little bridge). If you were allowed to use a reference point inside the penalty area and then use one club length to find relief outside of that penalty area, you would be able to drop right next to the bridge (no closer to the hole). Now granted, in that example the difference would only be a few yards. But imagine if the size and shape of that penalty area was such that the difference would be 100 yards.

 

OR....

 

Let's say that shaded yellow area is all mud and crap or deep rough and not an ideal place to drop from. Under the old rule, you would have to keep retreating backward on the line to find a suitable place from which to drop (let's say back across that cart path in your example). Now let's say that within one club length of that shaded area can put you on a nicely mowed, dry and flat piece of turf that would be perfect for a little pitch shot. The reference point is not in the penalty area. The relief area is within one club length of there and not closer to the hole. And now you're pitching onto the green instead of going back a considerable distance.

 

 

Edit: I did not see your last sentence about the reference point not being allowed in the same penalty area until after I wrote this. When I read through the rules, I saw that the relief area could not be in the penalty area. But I did not see the same thing for the reference point. I will take your word on that. And if that is indeed true, that would negate the first part of what I just wrote up above. But the second scenario would still apply.

[Sawgrass]

This is indeed an interesting question and obviously one of the many parts of the new Rules written unclear.

 

My questions are:

- may a reference point be on the same penalty area? IMO no as it is not possible today either.

- may part of the relief area be on the same penalty area?.

- does R17.1d(3)/1 only apply to lateral penalty areas?

 

Is the term "reference point" new for the 2019 rules? Or do the current rules also use "reference point" when describing straight-line-through drops? If "reference point" is in fact already a thing (and is currently forbidden inside the yellow/red lines) then I can see you being correct based on that.

 

Even though in current Rules there is no such thing as a reference point, a ball must be dropped behind the yellow-marked water hazard so there is absolutely no ambiguity about that. As I cannot believe this principle would have changed the new Rules are just poorly written in this respect.

 

Furthermore, as the yellow penalty areas have been preserved the current principle of having to hit a ball over a yellow penalty area (currently water hazard) instead of carrying it must still prevail. Thus it does not sound at all logical to drop a ball on the green side of Augusta #12 in described situation.

I can envision a situation in which a ball enters a yellow penalty area (or hazard) on the green side. If the penalty area (hazard) curves significantly, there could be a location on the green side of the penalty area which keeps the entry point between you and the hole. This would be a legitimate drop location under either set of rules for a yellow hazard. I don't think the introduction of the "reference point" changes this possibility. I've added a picture of a hole from my course showing this potential situation. The hazard in front of the green is marked as yellow hazard until you get past the cart path bridge..

 

And to answer a comment from the previous post, the rules specifically say the reference point "may be in any area of the course except the same penalty area."

As to your last sentence, it says that about the relief area, and, I think, unfortunately, not about the reference point.

 

As to your illustarttion, I certainly agree that in 2018 one could make a drop from a yellow WH where the subsequent shot almost didn't have to go over the water, but with the new relief area concept, you are literally allowed some lateral relief for a back-on-the-line drop, and it seems that that may create some dramatic opportunites.

[Colin L]

And to answer a comment from the previous post, the rules specifically say the reference point "may be in any area of the course except the same penalty area."

 

Where exactly is this said?

[fairways4life]

And to answer a comment from the previous post, the rules specifically say the reference point "may be in any area of the course except the same penalty area."

 

Where exactly is this said?

 

Yeah I think there's some real confusion here. The rule says the RELIEF AREA may not be in the penalty area but I am not seeing anything about the REFERENCE POINT not being allowed in the penalty area. Relief area and reference point are not the same thing.

• Reference Point: A point on the course chosen by the player that is on the reference line and is farther from the hole than the estimated point (with no limit on how far back on the line):
  
  • In choosing this reference point, the player should indicate the point by using an object (such as a tee).
    
  • If the player drops the ball without having chosen this point, the reference point is treated as being the point on the line that is the same distance from the hole as where the dropped ball first touched the ground.
    

That's all it gives as far as defining a reference point. Nothing about needing to be outside of a penalty area.

 

The next bullet points describe the requirements for the relief area and go on to say that the relief area may not be in the penalty area. But again, relief area is different from reference point.

• Size of Relief Area Measured from Reference Point: One club-length, but with these limits:
  
• Limits on Location of Relief Area:
  
  • Must not be nearer the hole than the reference point, and
    
  • May be in any area of the course except the same penalty area, but
    
  • If more than one area of the course is located within one club-length of the reference point, the ball must come to rest in the relief area in the same area of the course that the ball first touched when dropped in the relief area.
    

[davep043]

My apologies to all, I misread the rule, I now see that the reference point is not prohibited from being in the same penalty area, only that the relief area must not be. So it is possible in a rare situation to use a reference point still in the "hazard", go one clublength to the side into the general area, and have the following shot NOT have to negotiate the penalty area. I don't think this will be possible very often, but in my opinion the wording should be revised slightly to prohibit the reference point from being in the same penalty area.

[Colin L]

This is indeed an interesting question and obviously one of the many parts of the new Rules written unclear.

 

My questions are:

- may a reference point be on the same penalty area? IMO no as it is not possible today either.

- may part of the relief area be on the same penalty area?.

- does R17.1d(3)/1 only apply to lateral penalty areas?

 

Is the term "reference point" new for the 2019 rules? Or do the current rules also use "reference point" when describing straight-line-through drops? If "reference point" is in fact already a thing (and is currently forbidden inside the yellow/red lines) then I can see you being correct based on that.

 

 

Even though in current Rules there is no such thing as a reference point, a ball must be dropped behind the yellow-marked water hazard so there is absolutely no ambiguity about that. As I cannot believe this principle would have changed the new Rules are just poorly written in this respect.

 

Furthermore, as the yellow penalty areas have been preserved the current principle of having to hit a ball over a yellow penalty area (currently water hazard) instead of carrying it must still prevail. Thus it does not sound at all logical to drop a ball on the green side of Augusta #12 in described situation.

 

I don't think it helpful to refer back to principles explicit in the 2018 Rules and take it that they are implicit in the 2019 Rules. We have to take the new rules as read without imposing on them any assumptions. And we have to recognise new principles from what is actually written. If we are right that nothing is said to the effect that the reference point for back on the line relief from a penalty area cannot be in a penalty area and given that Interpretation 17.1d(3)/1 clearly indicates that the relief area outside a penalty area might be incomplete, I suggest that we need to take all this at its face value. A new rule, a new principle.

[fairways4life]

My apologies to all, I misread the rule, I now see that the reference point is not prohibited from being in the same penalty area, only that the relief area must not be. So it is possible in a rare situation to use a reference point still in the "hazard", go one clublength to the side into the general area, and have the following shot NOT have to negotiate the penalty area. I don't think this will be possible very often, but in my opinion the wording should be revised slightly to prohibit the reference point from being in the same penalty area.

 

Agreed.

 

1. It likely won't come into play all that often (or make a significant difference all that often), but there will certainly be rare cases where it both does come into play AND makes a huge difference. If the stars all aligned just right, it could be the difference between hitting a full 5-iron and chipping.

 

2. They should probably write something in to eliminate it as a potential loophole.

 

3. For the life of me I can't believe they would have overlooked this after all the time they spent drafting and reviewing the new rules.

[SNIPERBBB]

I'm sure once we've had a full season, as in all the Majors, and AM tournaments have been played the ruling bodies will be able to have practical evaluations of the new rules and bugs will be squashed.

[Augster]

I've got a question. I think a few of my fellow players will empathize.

 

I think the rules changes for 2019 are the worst. Seems to me pace has taken a front seat to the traditions and integrity of the game.

 

So, if I play as if there are no rules changes will I be in violation of any of the new rules?

 

I missed a couple in my previous reply. And most of the changes have to do with drops as that is the big thing that changed.

 

You mark your drop area with your driver and only your driver.(if it’s the longest club in your bag that isn’t a putter)

 

Also, when the ball is dropped from your knee, it only has to bounce out of the relief area to be redropped. Before it had to roll 2CL’s. Now you drop twice and place.

 

Lastly, on the green, if you’ve marked the ball and replaced, and then if the ball moves due to natural forces, you replace to where it was marked. If the ball has not been marked, you play from the new place. This change will come into play almost never, but knowing it will save you from a “wrong place” penalty.

[Colin L]

Just one wee amendment, Augster. You can mark your relief area with a shorter club than your longest one. But a club-length is still the length of your longest. That means that if you measured with a wedge, say, and your ball rolled after hitting the ground beyond the length or two lengths of your wedge but stopped within one or two club-lengths as measured by your longest club, it is in play.

[nsxguy]

There a references to the "reference point" in the link that fairways gave; in the diagrams to the right side of the page.

 

https://www.randa.or...edition/rule-17

 

But the red and yellow penalty areas should be easy to remember. They're essentially the same as they've always been except

 

1) They're now "penalty areas" instead of hazards.

2) You now have 2 club lengths either side of where you would have dropped before.

3) You no longer have the opposite margin option for the now red/lateral penalty area.

Not so. When you go back-on-the-line, you have one club-length on each side of the reference point. Or did I miss your point?

 

You're correct, too much in a hurry I guess. 2 club lengths total, 1 club length either side.

 

Actually, now that I look at it again it seems as though it's 2 lengths for a RED P.A. and 1 club length either side for a YELLOW P.A.

 

Thanks.

[Sawgrass]

My apologies to all, I misread the rule, I now see that the reference point is not prohibited from being in the same penalty area, only that the relief area must not be. So it is possible in a rare situation to use a reference point still in the "hazard", go one clublength to the side into the general area, and have the following shot NOT have to negotiate the penalty area. I don't think this will be possible very often, but in my opinion the wording should be revised slightly to prohibit the reference point from being in the same penalty area.

 

Agreed.

 

1. It likely won't come into play all that often (or make a significant difference all that often), but there will certainly be rare cases where it both does come into play AND makes a huge difference. If the stars all aligned just right, it could be the difference between hitting a full 5-iron and chipping.

 

2. They should probably write something in to eliminate it as a potential loophole.

 

3. For the life of me I can't believe they would have overlooked this after all the time they spent drafting and reviewing the new rules.

As this issue develops in my mind, I fear that the potential to take a drop from a yellow penalty area on the green-side of the penalty area will be surprisingly common (if we've got this loophole understood properly). Any time a penalty area angles off fairly sharply (for instance if a pond fronting a green has an edge that angles away 45* to the front of the green) there is apt to be a place within one club-length no closer to the hole that is out of the penalty area and still part of it would be an acceptable relief area. Depending on whether you are right or left handed, it may leave you standing in water, but still . . .