Immovable obstruction, looking for specific rule.

[xxio]

Ball is outside penalty area, cemented portion (immovable obstruction) inside the hazard interferes with stance/swing.

 

The player wants the specific rule that addresses it.

 

Can't seem to remember, watching the Women's US Open from 2am to 6am 3 days in a row in my timezone may have something to do with it.

[sui generis]

R16.1.a(2)

 

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=fr&section=rule&rulenum=16&subrulenum=1

[Newby]

7 hours ago, xxio said:

Ball is outside penalty area, cemented portion (immovable obstruction) inside the hazard interferes with stance/swing.

 

NB It is the location of the ball that matters

[jobin]

Would be helpful if actual, practical result of Rule is mentioned, as Newby has done.  Using my Android device in my country i cannot open the website listed by sui generis.  On my laptop, no problem.

Quote

 

 

[Halebopp]

Interesting, the rules section of the USGA site doesn't load at all on my Android either. It fails to load the "frames" in which the rules and the table of contents are.

[sui generis]

23 minutes ago, jobin said:

Would be helpful if actual, practical result of Rule is mentioned, as Newby has done.  Using my Android device in my country i cannot open the website listed by sui generis.  On my laptop, no problem.

 

 

OP specifically asked for the Rule. That was provided. I'm sorry that I muddled the reply with a link.

[sui generis]

16.1 Abnormal Course Conditions (Including Immovable Obstructions)
This Rule covers free relief that is allowed from interference by animal holes, ground under repair, immovable obstructions or temporary water:

These are collectively called abnormal course conditions, but each has a separate Definition.

This Rule does not give relief from movable obstructions (a different type of free relief is allowed under Rule 15.2a) or boundary objects or integral objects (no free relief is allowed).

a. When Relief Is Allowed
(1) Meaning of Interference by Abnormal Course Condition. Interference exists when any one of these is true:
The player’s ball touches or is in or on an abnormal course condition,

An abnormal course condition physically interferes with the player’s area of intended stance or area of intended swing, or

Only when the ball is on the putting green, an abnormal course condition on or off the putting green intervenes on the line of play.

If the abnormal course condition is close enough to distract the player but does not meet any of these requirements, there is no interference under this Rule.

See Committee Procedures, Section 8; Model Local Rule F-6 (the Committee may adopt a Local Rule denying relief from an abnormal course condition that only interferes with the area of intended stance).

(2) Relief Allowed Anywhere on Course Except When Ball Is in Penalty Area. Relief from interference by an abnormal course condition is allowed under Rule 16.1 only when both:
The abnormal course condition is on the course (not out of bounds), and

The ball is anywhere on the course, except in a penalty area (where the player’s only relief is under Rule 17).

[Axiom]

Newby noted the importance of the location of the ball in this case, i.e. outside the penalty area while the immovable obstruction is inside the penalty area. If however, the ball was inside the penalty area there would be no relief available from the abnormal course condition (17.3).

[Sawgrass]

It may be useful to note that sometimes local rules prohibit free relief from some immovable obstructions within a penalty area (even when your ball is outside it).  For instance, the Metropolitan Golf Association's hard card states in part:

 

Artificial walls and pilings when located in penalty areas and bunkers are Integral Objects.  No free relief is available.

[sui generis]

24 minutes ago, Sawgrass said:

It may be useful to note that sometimes local rules prohibit free relief from some immovable obstructions within a penalty area (even when your ball is outside it).  For instance, the Metropolitan Golf Association's hard card states in part:

 

Artificial walls and pilings when located in penalty areas and bunkers are Integral Objects.  No free relief is available.

 

The Carolinas Golf Association hard card as a similar restriction. I cannot see the need to complicate a pretty good R16 with yet another trap for the unwary. (However, I blame the Road Hole for most complications in the Rules.)

[Mr. Bean]

2 hours ago, sui generis said:

 

The Carolinas Golf Association hard card as a similar restriction. I cannot see the need to complicate a pretty good R16 with yet another trap for the unwary.

 

I agree totally!!!

 

If there are Immovable Obstructions on the course why some of them are Integral Objects?? So much unnecessary confusion is IMO created and for what? Who would suffer or benefit from all Immovable Obstructions being Immovable Obstructions? After all, it is same for everyone.

 

I am all for 'No Integral Objects' protest ! !

[Newby]

5 hours ago, Sawgrass said:

It may be useful to note that sometimes local rules prohibit free relief from some immovable obstructions within a penalty area (even when your ball is outside it).  For instance, the Metropolitan Golf Association's hard card states in part:

 

Artificial walls and pilings when located in penalty areas and bunkers are Integral Objects.  No free relief is available.

Artificial objects defined by the Committee as integral objects are not obstructions or boundary objects.

[Newby]

2 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

I agree totally!!!

 

If there are Immovable Obstructions on the course why some of them are Integral Objects?? So much unnecessary confusion is IMO created and for what? Who would suffer or benefit from all Immovable Obstructions being Immovable Obstructions? After all, it is same for everyone.

 

I am all for 'No Integral Objects' protest ! !

Many of these Integral Objects existed before the course was built. They were intended to be an integral part of playing the course. eg the wall at North Berwick? (Colin may be able to confirm)

Edited December 13, 2020 by Newby

[sui generis]

1 hour ago, Newby said:

Many of these Integral Objects existed before the course was built. They were intended to be an integral part of playing the course. eg the wall at North Berwick? (Colin may be able to confirm)

 

And are perfect candidates for Local Rules. Cluttering up the "hard card" with them only serves to confuse. Jeez, you'd think that you people invented golf or something. 😉

[Sawgrass]

40 minutes ago, sui generis said:

 

And are perfect candidates for Local Rules. Cluttering up the "hard card" with them only serves to confuse. Jeez, you'd think that you people invented golf or something. 😉

I believe you are advocating to exclude some local rules from a hard card (which IMO is meant to provide a consistent framework of local rules) and only introduce them occasionally.  I’m not sure that really gets you on the trail I’ve long seen you seek.

 

BTW, I love the wood planks/integral objects fronting the greenside bunkers on hole #13 at Harbour Town. 

[Sawgrass]

2 hours ago, Newby said:

Artificial objects defined by the Committee as integral objects are not obstructions or boundary objects.

Indeed they are.

[sui generis]

14 minutes ago, Sawgrass said:

I believe you are advocating to exclude some local rules from a hard card (which IMO is meant to provide a consistent framework of local rules) and only introduce them occasionally.  I’m not sure that really gets you on the trail I’ve long seen you seek.

 

BTW, I love the wood planks/integral objects fronting the greenside bunkers on hole #13 at Harbour Town. 

 

I know, my soapbox is just that. My local Allied Golf Association's hard card has so much extraneous stuff on it that to fit it on one page the type size is about 6 point. 

 

It's handy to know that for all GCA events, that mulch chips are treated as loose impediments or when and how the player may deal with aeration holes or immovable obstructions near the putting green. It's decidedly unhelpful to be told that there might or might not be some Local Rule about obstructions which are not.

 

Newby's red herring doesn't cut it. If Sir Lancelot's outhouse was there before the golf course was created, no matter, it's still an immovable obstruction . . . don't get me started on Pete Dye's Harbor Town gimcracks either. 

 

ps It was toasty and sunny in Asheville this afternoon.

[Sawgrass]

3 hours ago, sui generis said:

 

 

 

ps It was toasty and sunny in Asheville this afternoon.

I wish I had a comeback for that, but I think I’ll just concede. 

[Mr. Bean]

19 hours ago, Newby said:

Many of these Integral Objects existed before the course was built. They were intended to be an integral part of playing the course. eg the wall at North Berwick? (Colin may be able to confirm)

 

Yes, but why? What are the benefits and to whom?

 

We have a course in Southern Finland with an ancient tomb by one of the fairways. That tomb certainly was there before the course was built. But you know what? It is not an integral part of the course...

[Mr. Bean]

So far nobody has even tried to explain why a certain object that qualifies as an Obstruction has seen necessary to be declared as an Integral Object of the course. A mere note that 'it was there before the course' is far from satisfactory. So, let me ask it again.

 

What benefits there are in NOT allowing a free relief from a construction fulfilling the Definition of an Obstruction?

[Sawgrass]

5 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

So far nobody has even tried to explain why a certain object that qualifies as an Obstruction has seen necessary to be declared as an Integral Object of the course. A mere note that 'it was there before the course' is far from satisfactory. So, let me ask it again.

 

What benefits there are in NOT allowing a free relief from a construction fulfilling the Definition of an Obstruction?

As I pointed out earlier, declaring an object integral creates some interesting challenges, as in #13 at Harbour Town and I believe the Road Hole at St Andrews.  (That wall is an integral object, isn't it?)  I'm sure there are other fine examples.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Sawgrass

[Mr. Bean]

2 minutes ago, Sawgrass said:

As I pointed out earlier, declaring an object integral creates some interesting challenges, as in #13 at Harbour Town and I believe the Road Hole at St Andrews.  (That wall is an integral object, isn't it?)  I'm sure there are other fine examples.

 

Sure, interesting challenges can be created but is it worth the confusion created?

[Halebopp]

Would anyone happen to know whether the wooden support structure surrounding the island green at TPC Sawgrass is an obstruction or an integral object?

 

Or do you recall experiences from other similar places with such support structures so close to the green?

 

We have a par 3 over a lake with little room in between the green and the structure.

 

The fringe has spread over the structure so it's not a problem to play the ball on or close to it (except for the limited room to take a proper stance) but it would result in debates about whether or not the structure is actually affecting the conditions. The second problem would be locating the NPCR, which could be relatively far away to get full relief and to keep the ball off the green.

 

For those reasons I've thought it's easier, and more likely, for people to play the hole by the rules when the structure is an integral object rather than an obstruction.

 

[Mr. Bean]

29 minutes ago, Halebopp said:

Would anyone happen to know whether the wooden support structure surrounding the island green at TPC Sawgrass is an obstruction or an integral object?

 

Or do you recall experiences from other similar places with such support structures so close to the green?

 

We have a par 3 over a lake with little room in between the green and the structure.

 

The fringe has spread over the structure so it's not a problem to play the ball on or close to it (except for the limited room to take a proper stance) but it would result in debates about whether or not the structure is actually affecting the conditions. The second problem would be locating the NPCR, which could be relatively far away to get full relief and to keep the ball off the green.

 

For those reasons I've thought it's easier, and more likely, for people to play the hole by the rules when the structure is an integral object rather than an obstruction.

 

 

A drop zone is an option.

[sui generis]

1 hour ago, Sawgrass said:

I believe the Road Hole at St Andrews.  (That wall is an integral object, isn't it?)

 

The skeptic in me thinks the Road Hole wall is a boundary object and thus is the cause of the lack of relief from man-made stuff off the course. While the rest of the world might thank the Scots for golf, they've some case for cursing that wall. Were it not for that wall then we might treat immovable man-made things off the course in the same way we treat them on the course.

[Halebopp]

8 minutes ago, sui generis said:

 

The skeptic in me thinks the Road Hole wall is a boundary object and thus is the cause of the lack of relief from man-made stuff off the course. While the rest of the world might thank the Scots for golf, they've some case for cursing that wall. Were it not for that wall then we might treat immovable man-made things off the course in the same way we treat them on the course.

 

Yep, it's a boundary object.

 

[rogolf]

12 minutes ago, sui generis said:

 

The skeptic in me thinks the Road Hole wall is a boundary object and thus is the cause of the lack of relief from man-made stuff off the course. While the rest of the world might thank the Scots for golf, they've some case for cursing that wall. Were it not for that wall then we might treat immovable man-made things off the course in the same way we treat them on the course.

That wall is a boundary object.  However, the asphalt path between the green and the boundary wall is integral (I believe that it represents the railway tracks that originally went through there, which were also integral - there are photos of players playing from between the rails and ties).  Grannie Clark's Wynd, the asphalt road which crosses holes 1 and 18 is also integral.

Perhaps we should leave such decisions to those in charge of the course(s).  We had a saying at work about some decisions, "devised at head office to be implemented in the field."  Several of those decisions ended in quick failure.

Edited December 14, 2020 by rogolf

[Halebopp]

9 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

A drop zone is an option.

 

That would be an option. The hole does already have a DZ for those who end up in the water off the tee. The players wouldn't use that one to take relief from the structure though as it's some 30-40 meters away from the green and having two different DZs for different situations on a par 3 would definitely wreak havoc.

[Newby]

19 hours ago, sui generis said:

 

And are perfect candidates for Local Rules. Cluttering up the "hard card" with them only serves to confuse. Jeez, you'd think that you people invented golf or something. 😉

It would save even more confusion, printers' ink and paper if free relief was not available for any artificial object that cannot be moved.

 

'Play it as it lies' is great simplifier.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Newby

[sui generis]

29 minutes ago, Newby said:

It would save even more confusion, printers' ink and paper if free relief was not available for any artificial object that cannot be moved.

 

'Play it as it lies' is great simplifier.

 

I don't think many would like that.

 

What'd save "ink and paper" and reduce confusion (and be more fun) would be to treat immovable manmade things on and off the course the same and that includes those in penalty areas.

 

After all, we treat movable manmade things the same everywhere, right?