Out of Bounds?

[sui generis]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @Halebopp said:

> > > @BiggErn said:

> > > Then I can assume it’s a hazard that’s overflowed so casual water at the edge.

> >

> > No you simply can not:

> >

> > > 17.1a/1 Ball Is in Penalty Area Even if Penalty Area Is Improperly Marked

> > >

> > > If stakes defining a body of water as a penalty area are improperly located, a player is not allowed to take advantage of such an error by the Committee.

> > >

> > > For example, a ball is found in an expanse of water that, because of the configuration of the ground, is clearly part of the penalty area but is outside the stakes and, thus, technically outside the penalty area. The player may not claim that the ball at rest in the water is in temporary water since a penalty area includes any body of water on the course, whether or not marked by the Committee (see definition of "penalty area").

> >

> >

>

> Sure I can. A hazard that is flooded is free relief. Since we can’t use common sense to determine when there’s obvious missing stakes for a boundary or hazard then use what judgement best suits you. Anyone that thinks the op’s ball is OB based on the picture he posted aren’t the brightest bulbs on the Christmas tree and I’m just using their flawed logic to show how asinine it is.

 

Change your screen name to BiggError

[Vindog]

I have a hard time believing that a county AM is playing divots as gur.

[JSPXXVII]

Actually everyone that I know plays divots as GUR, ONLY on fairways. Some of these public courses are poorly maintained. No one that I play with has a problem with that rule.

[Vindog]

> @JSPXXVII said:

> Actually everyone that I know plays divots as GUR, ONLY on fairways. Some of these public courses are poorly maintained. No one that I play with has a problem with that rule.

 

Of course they don't, and that's usually the case when people don't want to deal with a challenge of some sort. And I'll add that it's fine for your groups or leagues or whatever even if I don't agree with that practice. But I have a hard time believing that a Regional Am is playing that way.

[Sawgrass]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @Halebopp said:

> > > @BiggErn said:

> > > Then I can assume it’s a hazard that’s overflowed so casual water at the edge.

> >

> > No you simply can not:

> >

> > > 17.1a/1 Ball Is in Penalty Area Even if Penalty Area Is Improperly Marked

> > >

> > > If stakes defining a body of water as a penalty area are improperly located, a player is not allowed to take advantage of such an error by the Committee.

> > >

> > > For example, a ball is found in an expanse of water that, because of the configuration of the ground, is clearly part of the penalty area but is outside the stakes and, thus, technically outside the penalty area. The player may not claim that the ball at rest in the water is in temporary water since a penalty area includes any body of water on the course, whether or not marked by the Committee (see definition of "penalty area").

> >

> >

>

> Sure I can. A hazard that is flooded is free relief. Since we can’t use common sense to determine when there’s obvious missing stakes for a boundary or hazard then use what judgement best suits you. Anyone that thinks the op’s ball is OB based on the picture he posted aren’t the brightest bulbs on the Christmas tree and I’m just using their flawed logic to show how asinine it is.

 

Another proponent of "common sense" bites the dust.

[BiggErn]

> @Vindog said:

> I have a hard time believing that a county AM is playing divots as gur.

 

Actually they played ball in hand last I heard.

[Hawkeye77]

> @JSPXXVII said:

> Actually everyone that I know plays divots as GUR, ONLY on fairways. Some of these public courses are poorly maintained. No one that I play with has a problem with that rule.

 

Was generally supportive before, lol, but if you aren’t following the rules in general why the big fuss about the OB?

 

Calling yourself selfish if you had looked for the stakes is just another excuse for simply not taking a grand total of one or two minutes to look for them. How is everybody else at your ball making this “ruling” before you even get there?

 

Anyway, still one hole out of hundreds, you’ll get somebody else’s money this week. Seems like changing the subject and taking this thread all over the place has it beyond the simple “vent” it started out as.

 

At least you know how to proceed on the future in this question, so mission accomplished?

[Vindog]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @Vindog said:

> > I have a hard time believing that a county AM is playing divots as gur.

>

> Actually they played ball in hand last I heard.

 

9ball? I thought this was a golf forum. Kidding.

 

Course must have been wet. In any case, that’s different from declaring divot holes as gur

[gioguy21]

> @Vindog said:

> > @BiggErn said:

> > > @Vindog said:

> > > I have a hard time believing that a county AM is playing divots as gur.

> >

> > Actually they played ball in hand last I heard.

>

> 9ball? I thought this was a golf forum.

 

it all makes sense now. Ern was talking billiard rules the whole time -- lol

[BiggErn]

> @Vindog said:

> > @BiggErn said:

> > > @Vindog said:

> > > I have a hard time believing that a county AM is playing divots as gur.

> >

> > Actually they played ball in hand last I heard.

>

> 9ball? I thought this was a golf forum. Kidding.

>

> Course must have been wet. In any case, that’s different from declaring divot holes as gur

 

Under normal conditions

[Vindog]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @Vindog said:

> > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > @Vindog said:

> > > > I have a hard time believing that a county AM is playing divots as gur.

> > >

> > > Actually they played ball in hand last I heard.

> >

> > 9ball? I thought this was a golf forum. Kidding.

> >

> > Course must have been wet. In any case, that’s different from declaring divot holes as gur

>

> Under normal conditions

 

Not a normal tournament.

[PoolPond]

> @JSPXXVII said:

> Enclosed photo indicates birds eye view of a hole that we were playing. White dot indicates out of bounds marker. Red dot indicates location of my ball. 2 of my playing partners vehemently argued that my ball was out of bounds on the third hole.

>

> What do you guys think?

 

Simple. If there in not an additional OB white stake somewhere in that corner, your ball is OB. If there is, it's in. This fact based. If I'm with you and we look and there is no other OB stake in that corner, we have to say you're OB.

[PoolPond]

> @JSPXXVII said:

> Heres a full overview of this long par 5. To cut corner of a portion of playable area to declare OB? Should I have gone scouring for additional stakes, when pace of play is in question? To me their argument made no sense and still makes no sense.

 

I'm confused now by all of this. Uh yes you should be looking for an additional stake, espeically if you're this bent out of shape about it, and from what we can see in your photos, why did their argument make no sense? I'm assuming they simply did like we all do, they stand at one stake and looked at the other in a straight line and if you ball is outside of that line, you are OB. Simple

[BiggErn]

> @PoolPond said:

> > @JSPXXVII said:

> > Heres a full overview of this long par 5. To cut corner of a portion of playable area to declare OB? Should I have gone scouring for additional stakes, when pace of play is in question? To me their argument made no sense and still makes no sense.

>

> I'm confused now by all of this. Uh yes you should be looking for an additional stake, espeically if you're this bent out of shape about it, and from what we can see in your photos, why did their argument make no sense? I'm assuming they simply did like we all do, they stand at one stake and looked at the other in a straight line and if you ball is outside of that line, you are OB. Simple

 

Did you even look at the picture because you sound like you didn’t? The additional stake was marking a different boundary 60 yards away when there were 2 stakes 5 yards apart at his ball. All the self proclaimed rules gurus here claim you use the stake 60 yards away that marks a completely different boundary and take the fringe and other playable area and call it OB instead of assuming that there’s obviously stakes missing. Yet in other instances they say it’s ok to be hypocritical and assume where a boundary is even when not marked.

[BiggErn]

> @Vindog said:

> > @BiggErn said:

> > > @Vindog said:

> > > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > > @Vindog said:

> > > > > I have a hard time believing that a county AM is playing divots as gur.

> > > >

> > > > Actually they played ball in hand last I heard.

> > >

> > > 9ball? I thought this was a golf forum. Kidding.

> > >

> > > Course must have been wet. In any case, that’s different from declaring divot holes as gur

> >

> > Under normal conditions

>

> Not a normal tournament.

 

 

I’d call a county amateur a normal tournament. I don’t think they do it at every course or every year but it’s been done more than once.

[Sawgrass]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @PoolPond said:

> > > @JSPXXVII said:

> > > Heres a full overview of this long par 5. To cut corner of a portion of playable area to declare OB? Should I have gone scouring for additional stakes, when pace of play is in question? To me their argument made no sense and still makes no sense.

> >

> > I'm confused now by all of this. Uh yes you should be looking for an additional stake, espeically if you're this bent out of shape about it, and from what we can see in your photos, why did their argument make no sense? I'm assuming they simply did like we all do, they stand at one stake and looked at the other in a straight line and if you ball is outside of that line, you are OB. Simple

>

> Did you even look at the picture because you sound like you didn’t? The additional stake was marking a different boundary 60 yards away when there were 2 stakes 5 yards apart at his ball. All the self proclaimed rules gurus here claim you use the stake 60 yards away that marks a completely different boundary and take the fringe and other playable area and call it OB instead of assuming that there’s obviously stakes missing. Yet in other instances they say it’s ok to be hypocritical and assume where a boundary is even when not marked.

 

Who here thinks it reasonable to have part of a putting green be OB? Have you simply contrived controversy?

[Newby]

> @BiggErn said:

 

>

> Did you even look at the picture because you sound like you didn’t? The additional stake was marking a different boundary 60 yards away when there were 2 stakes 5 yards apart at his ball. All the self proclaimed rules gurus here claim you use the stake 60 yards away that marks a completely different boundary and take the fringe and other playable area and call it OB instead of assuming that there’s obviously stakes missing. Yet in other instances they say it’s ok to be hypocritical and assume where a boundary is even when not marked.

 

Given that there are one or more stakes missing, how do you project the line onwards. How do you determine if a ball, very close to the 'intended' line, is in or out?

The answer lies in the Rules.

[FEUO]

Bunch of sticklers in this group. And the OP's playing partners. If there is a serious match going on a second ball should have been played. After the ruling (whichever way it goes) I'd part ways with these partners and find a new group to play with. The game is supposed to be fun and looking at that layout its fair to assume the white stakes are marking the tree line and there should be one down in the corner.

Why Sawgrass and others are making this overly picky and taking away from the spirit of the game is beyond me. The playing partners should have suggested a second ball as well. Kick em to the curb.

[Vindog]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @Vindog said:

> > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > @Vindog said:

> > > > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > > > @Vindog said:

> > > > > > I have a hard time believing that a county AM is playing divots as gur.

> > > > >

> > > > > Actually they played ball in hand last I heard.

> > > >

> > > > 9ball? I thought this was a golf forum. Kidding.

> > > >

> > > > Course must have been wet. In any case, that’s different from declaring divot holes as gur

> > >

> > > Under normal conditions

> >

> > Not a normal tournament.

>

>

> I’d call a county amateur a normal tournament. I don’t think they do it at every course or every year but it’s been done more than once.

 

Funny that this story is evolving.

[sui generis]

> @bordercitygolfer said:

> Bunch of sticklers in this group. And the OP's playing partners. If there is a serious match going on a second ball should have been played. After the ruling (whichever way it goes) I'd part ways with these partners and find a new group to play with. The game is supposed to be fun and looking at that layout its fair to assume the white stakes are marking the tree line and there should be one down in the corner.

> Why Sawgrass and others are making this overly picky and taking away from the spirit of the game is beyond me. The playing partners should have suggested a second ball as well. Kick em to the curb.

 

The form of play is unclear. As you may know a "second ball" is not a match play tactic.

Yours truly,

Overly Picky II

[Vindog]

> @bordercitygolfer said:

> Bunch of sticklers in this group. And the OP's playing partners. If there is a serious match going on a second ball should have been played. After the ruling (whichever way it goes) I'd part ways with these partners and find a new group to play with. The game is supposed to be fun and looking at that layout its fair to assume the white stakes are marking the tree line and there should be one down in the corner.

> Why Sawgrass and others are making this overly picky and taking away from the spirit of the game is beyond me. The playing partners should have suggested a second ball as well. Kick em to the curb

 

So you are looking to find players willing to ignore a ball out of bounds in a “serious match?” Oh boy.

 

Those are the players I want to avoid, because they will expect you to overlook all of their penalties. No thanks. Just playing by the rules is easier and takes the subjectivity out of it. If I hit a ball OB or lose one, I’m not looking for someone to just let me “drop it wherever”

 

 

 

 

 

[Sawgrass]

> @bordercitygolfer said:

> Bunch of sticklers in this group. And the OP's playing partners. If there is a serious match going on a second ball should have been played. After the ruling (whichever way it goes) I'd part ways with these partners and find a new group to play with. The game is supposed to be fun and looking at that layout its fair to assume the white stakes are marking the tree line and there should be one down in the corner.

> Why Sawgrass and others are making this overly picky and taking away from the spirit of the game is beyond me. The playing partners should have suggested a second ball as well. Kick em to the curb.

 

What terrible advice. The one sure way to lose a hole in a match is to play a second ball. S&D and at least you’d have had a chance.

[BiggErn]

> @bordercitygolfer said:

> Bunch of sticklers in this group. And the OP's playing partners. If there is a serious match going on a second ball should have been played. After the ruling (whichever way it goes) I'd part ways with these partners and find a new group to play with. The game is supposed to be fun and looking at that layout its fair to assume the white stakes are marking the tree line and there should be one down in the corner.

> Why Sawgrass and others are making this overly picky and taking away from the spirit of the game is beyond me. The playing partners should have suggested a second ball as well. Kick em to the curb.

 

Yep. In a casual game when it’s that borderline or obvious the course has neglected their upkeep I let the player decide. If the proper stake had been present it would have been clearly in bounds. If it was a game that mattered 1.) the course would almost assuredly be clearly marked and 2.) someone outside the group would’ve been available to make the call. Some guys chomp at the bit to pull out their USGA handbook that most golfers already have then get defensive when you throw out some scenarios to show how subjective the rules can be. I’m sure the 400lb boulder Tiger had rolled as a “loose impediment” wouldn’t have been that if these sticklers were there and Phil would’ve been DQ’d at last year’s US Open.

[Vindog]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @bordercitygolfer said:

> > Bunch of sticklers in this group. And the OP's playing partners. If there is a serious match going on a second ball should have been played. After the ruling (whichever way it goes) I'd part ways with these partners and find a new group to play with. The game is supposed to be fun and looking at that layout its fair to assume the white stakes are marking the tree line and there should be one down in the corner.

> > Why Sawgrass and others are making this overly picky and taking away from the spirit of the game is beyond me. The playing partners should have suggested a second ball as well. Kick em to the curb.

>

> Yep. In a casual game when it’s that borderline or obvious the course has neglected their upkeep I let the player decide. If the proper stake had been present it would have been clearly in bounds. If it was a game that mattered 1.) the course would almost assuredly be clearly marked and 2.) someone outside the group would’ve been available to make the call. Some guys chomp at the bit to pull out their USGA handbook that most golfers already have then get defensive when you throw out some scenarios to show how subjective the rules can be. I’m sure the 400lb boulder Tiger had rolled as a “loose impediment” wouldn’t have been that if these sticklers were there and Phil would’ve been DQ’d at last year’s US Open.

 

A) it was not a casual game according to OP, and he did not look for another marker.

B ) and C) Poor effort please try again. The rule book would have pointed anyone in the same direction as the rules officials on site were pointed.

[Sawgrass]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @bordercitygolfer said:

> > Bunch of sticklers in this group. And the OP's playing partners. If there is a serious match going on a second ball should have been played. After the ruling (whichever way it goes) I'd part ways with these partners and find a new group to play with. The game is supposed to be fun and looking at that layout its fair to assume the white stakes are marking the tree line and there should be one down in the corner.

> > Why Sawgrass and others are making this overly picky and taking away from the spirit of the game is beyond me. The playing partners should have suggested a second ball as well. Kick em to the curb.

>

> Yep. In a casual game when it’s that borderline or obvious the course has neglected their upkeep I let the player decide. If the proper stake had been present it would have been clearly in bounds. If it was a game that mattered 1.) the course would almost assuredly be clearly marked and 2.) someone outside the group would’ve been available to make the call. Some guys chomp at the bit to pull out their USGA handbook that most golfers already have then get defensive when you throw out some scenarios to show how subjective the rules can be. I’m sure the 400lb boulder Tiger had rolled as a “loose impediment” wouldn’t have been that if these sticklers were there and Phil would’ve been DQ’d at last year’s US Open.

 

The people here who actually bother to learn the rules (rather than make crap up and claim it to be common sense) know, and knew, that Tiger's boulder roll was in the books as a decision prior to his employing it.

[sui generis]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @bordercitygolfer said:

> > Bunch of sticklers in this group. And the OP's playing partners. If there is a serious match going on a second ball should have been played. After the ruling (whichever way it goes) I'd part ways with these partners and find a new group to play with. The game is supposed to be fun and looking at that layout its fair to assume the white stakes are marking the tree line and there should be one down in the corner.

> > Why Sawgrass and others are making this overly picky and taking away from the spirit of the game is beyond me. The playing partners should have suggested a second ball as well. Kick em to the curb.

>

> Yep. In a casual game when it’s that borderline or obvious the course has neglected their upkeep I let the player decide. If the proper stake had been present it would have been clearly in bounds. If it was a game that mattered 1.) the course would almost assuredly be clearly marked and 2.) someone outside the group would’ve been available to make the call. Some guys chomp at the bit to pull out their USGA handbook that most golfers already have then get defensive when you throw out some scenarios to show how subjective the rules can be. I’m sure the 400lb boulder Tiger had rolled as a “loose impediment” wouldn’t have been that if these sticklers were there and Phil would’ve been DQ’d at last year’s US Open.

 

BiggError strikes again.

[YoungJedi]

I don’t think any group in which a guy is taking an 11 is a “serious match”

[YoungJedi]

> @YoungJedi said:

> How is this thread still going?

 

Bump

[QEight]

> @YoungJedi said:

> I don’t think any group in which a guy is taking an 11 is a “serious match”

 

Yeah, I always thought the Masters is not that serious. Ok, I know it is not matchplay.