MGA Question 5

[Newby]

5. A player is playing a short dogleg right Par 4 with a maple tree at the corner of the dogleg and a nearby penalty area. The player’s drive goes into the tree. The player then changes to an iron and plays a provisional into the fairway, short of the maple tree. The second provisional shot goes into the maple tree and bounces backwards into the fairway, at the same time another ball falls from the tree and rolls into the penalty area. The player plays the provisional ball onto the green and starts walking to the green. The player’s caddie walks toward the other ball and prior to a three-minute search time expiring, picks it up, sees that it's the original ball and puts it back. The caddie informs the player that the original ball has been found. In the meantime, the player has reached the green, holes out the provisional ball with two putts, and then returns to play the original ball. The player chips out of the penalty area, pitches onto the green and holes out in two putts.

The player’s score is:

A. 6

B. 7

C. 8

D. 10

[Halebopp]

This one is quite silly with its ambiguity.

 

Did the player make a putt with the provisional before the caddie found the original ball? If yes, which one of the two provisionals did the player play onto the green?

 

Assuming the the original ball was found before the first putt, I'd say the answer is C, 8.

 

Spoiler

1st tee shot, 2nd & 3rd, playing a wrong ball, 4th caddie picking up the original, 5-8 playing out the hole with the original.

 

 

[antip]

Agree, insufficient clear information to identify the rules outcomes. I thought there was only one provisional in play though. 

 

Agree, a key issue is timing of 'finding' the original ball. If before that putt with the provisional, then the PB became a wrong ball. If it was after (no unambiguous information on this) then provisional became ball in play, hole was completed and the action with the original ball was irrelevant.

 

Another quirk: if there was awareness that the original ball was in the tree, then the rules required that the original ball (if original ball needed to be proceeded with) be replaced after it was moved, so playing it from elsewhere would be a wrong place.

 

Harder than ever to take this MGA question seriously.

[rogolf]

1 hour ago, antip said:

Agree, insufficient clear information to identify the rules outcomes. I thought there was only one provisional in play though. 

 

Agree, a key issue is timing of 'finding' the original ball. If before that putt with the provisional, then the PB became a wrong ball. If it was after (no unambiguous information on this) then provisional became ball in play, hole was completed and the action with the original ball was irrelevant.

 

Another quirk: if there was awareness that the original ball was in the tree, then the rules required that the original ball (if original ball needed to be proceeded with) be replaced after it was moved, so playing it from elsewhere would be a wrong place.

 

Harder than ever to take this MGA question seriously.

I think the player hit the provisional ball that was in the fairway into the tree, although it can be read that he played a second provisional.

second provisional shot = a shot from the fairway with the only provisional

Here's how I interpret the sequence of events (could be wrong - very ambiguous)

1.  player hits tee shot into maple tree,

2.  player hits a provisional ball (with an iron)

3. player hits second shot with the provisional ball into the maple tree, ball bounces back into the fairway

4. when the provisional ball hits the tree, another ball fell out of the tree

5. player hits the provisional again, onto the green

6. caddie finds original ball, picks it up and puts it back

7. caddie informs player about original ball

8. player holes out the provisional with two putts

9. player returns to play out the hole with the original ball with four more strokes

 

Edited February 16, 2021 by rogolf

[TerpFangolfer]

Ok, I was thinking B bcuz he played the Prov closer to the hole, but yeah I guess the caddy had found the original prior.

[Wendy123]

A heads up-the wording has been changed so that neither the caddie nor the player know that the original ball was dislodged from the tree. It has been changed to :

"Unbeknownst to the player and caddie, at the same time another ball falls from the tree and rolls into the penalty area.”

Have fun!

 

[Mr. Bean]

2 hours ago, Wendy123 said:

A heads up-the wording has been changed so that neither the caddie nor the player know that the original ball was dislodged from the tree. It has been changed to :

"Unbeknownst to the player and caddie, at the same time another ball falls from the tree and rolls into the penalty area.”

 

 

Have fun!

 

 

 

So, the question was changed to match the decided (or desired...) answer..?

 

I am having sooooooo much fun...

Edited March 15, 2021 by Mr. Bean

[limegreengent]

I see that MGA are now following the authorities by  introducing " Clarifications".

All we need now is the remaining 15 or so clarifications.🤗🤗🤗

 

[Wendy123]

1 hour ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

So, the question was changed to match the decided (or desired...) answer..?

 

I am having sooooooo much fun...

Actually, there was agreement on the answer but we couldn't agree on how we got there! By making this change we are now in agreement. I think. Maybe. Have fun!

[antip]

1 hour ago, Wendy123 said:

Actually, there was agreement on the answer but we couldn't agree on how we got there! By making this change we are now in agreement. I think. Maybe. Have fun!

Sounds like uni philosophy exams. The answers stay the same, only the questions change each year.

[antip]

9 hours ago, Wendy123 said:

Actually, there was agreement on the answer but we couldn't agree on how we got there! By making this change we are now in agreement. I think. Maybe. Have fun!

That change helps deal with some of the issues that were not explained. Now you just need to deal with the total ambiguity about the sequencing in the second half of the question! There is no clear information relating to the timing of caddie informing the player and the "in the meantime" words. Precisely what is contained in the "meantime". It is not possible to have a useful rules discussion in the absence of a plain English explanation of the sequencing. Or you can just keep drinking your own Kool Aid.

[Newby]

Before:

5. A player is playing a short dogleg right Par 4 with a maple tree at the corner of the dogleg and a nearby penalty area. The player’s drive goes into the tree. The player then changes to an iron and plays a provisional into the fairway, short of the maple tree. The second provisional shot goes into the maple tree and bounces backwards into the fairway, at the same time another ball falls from the tree and rolls into the penalty area.

The player plays the provisional ball onto the green and starts walking to the green. The player’s caddie walks toward the other ball and prior to a three-minute search time expiring, picks it up, sees that it's the original ball and puts it back. The caddie informs the player that the original ball has been found. In the meantime, the player has reached the green, holes out the provisional ball with two putts, and then returns to play the original ball. The player chips out of the penalty area, pitches onto the green and holes out in two putts.

The player’s score is:

A. 6

B. 7

C. 8

D. 10

 

After:

5. A player is playing a short dogleg right Par 4 with a maple tree at the corner of the dogleg and a nearby penalty area. The player’s drive goes into the tree. The player then changes to an iron and plays a provisional into the fairway, short of the maple tree. The second provisional shot goes into the maple tree and bounces backwards into the fairway.

Unbeknownst to the player and caddie, at the same time another ball falls from the tree and rolls into the penalty area.

The player plays the provisional ball onto the green and starts walking to the green. The player’s caddie walks toward the other ball and prior to a three-minute search time expiring, picks it up, sees that it's the original ball and puts it back. The caddie informs the player that the original ball has been found. In the meantime, the player has reached the green, holes out the provisional ball with two putts, and then returns to play the original ball. The player chips out of the penalty area, pitches onto the green and holes out in two putts.

The player’s score is:

A. 6

B. 7

C. 8

D. 10

[Mr. Bean]

I agree with antip. That change in words does not solve the actual issue of timing of the events. It is impossible to make a correct ruling with given information as we can only ASSUME the player receives the information of the original ball having been found BEFORE he makes a stroke at the PB on the green but we do not KNOW it.

 

Then again, our assumption may be wrong as well as the ruling...

 

That question has been poorly laid out, IMO.

 

Edited March 16, 2021 by Mr. Bean

[Newby]

#5 C Rule 18.3c(3), Rule 9.6, Rule 14.1, Rule 1.3b(2)

[Mr. Bean]

Can someone explain this to me stroke by stroke, please?

[Newby]

46 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

Can someone explain this to me stroke by stroke, please?

Sorry no, that's above my pay scale but I'm sure Wendy can.

Edited March 16, 2021 by Newby

[antip]

7 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

Can someone explain this to me stroke by stroke, please?

IMO, you can only get the MGA answer (with clarity) if you accept their previous correction and if you replace "In the meantime," with something that makes clear that the actions with the PB on the green occur AFTER the caddie informs the player that the original ball has been found - for example, replace with "Subsequently,".

With those changes to the jumbled original wording, the stroke by stroke then is:

 

Counting strokes: drive; chip side ways with the original ball from the PA; pitch to green plus 2 putts - total 5.

Penalty strokes: caddie moves original ball in play and replaces it -1 stroke penalty; player hits (formerly) PB now wrong ball (because original has been found) for further general penalty.

Total 8, answer C.

 

The original question was a horrible mess that gives rules nerds a bad name.

 

 

[Mr. Bean]

Thanks, antip.

 

I agree, this question was a very poor one. Don't they ever test these with experienced people before publishing???

[limegreengent]

8 hours ago, antip said:

IMO, you can only get the MGA answer (with clarity) if you accept their previous correction and if you replace "In the meantime," with something that makes clear that the actions with the PB on the green occur AFTER the caddie informs the player that the original ball has been found - for example, replace with "Subsequently,".

With those changes to the jumbled original wording, the stroke by stroke then is:

 

Counting strokes: drive; chip side ways with the original ball from the PA; pitch to green plus 2 putts - total 5.

Penalty strokes: caddie moves original ball in play and replaces it -1 stroke penalty; player hits (formerly) PB now wrong ball (because original has been found) for further general penalty.

Total 8, answer C.

 

The original question was a horrible mess that gives rules nerds a bad name.

 

 

 

I completely agree with how you have explained the score of 8 as provided by MGA.

Particularly agreeing with the poor quality of the presentation of the question.

 

Ref your comment:

"Something that makes clear that the actions with the PB on the green occur AFTER the caddie informs the player that the original ball has been found"

 

The rules state (10.3c) that the player is regarded as possessing any knowledge possessed by the caddie.

Thus informing the player would not be quite correct.

 

It does pose a question as to whether an exception should apply limiting the above 10.3c rule to make an allowance to say " when that knowledge is humanly possible " to be passed to the player.

Or whether that wording is absolute🤔🤔🤔

MGA may have been using this literal wording - but even so their question is still ambiguous

[antip]

8 minutes ago, limegreengent said:

 

I completely agree with how you have explained the score of 8 as provided by MGA.

Particularly agreeing with the poor quality of the presentation of the question.

 

Ref your comment:

"Something that makes clear that the actions with the PB on the green occur AFTER the caddie informs the player that the original ball has been found"

 

The rules state (10.3c) that the player is regarded as possessing any knowledge possessed by the caddie.

Thus informing the player would not be quite correct.

 

It does pose a question as to whether an exception should apply limiting the above 10.3c rule to make an allowance to say " when that knowledge is humanly possible " to be passed to the player.

Or whether that wording is absolute🤔🤔🤔

MGA may have been using this literal wording - but even so their question is still ambiguous

I think it is absolute, but I agree it doesn't make the question less ambiguous.

 

There is also nothing in the question that indicates when the search commenced. A possible read of the question is the player is on the green (short dog leg) and makes a putt prior to the original ball being found and moved. And in such a sequencing, the PB becomes ball in play and the original ball has no further relevance. In this world (possible due to the multiple inadequacies of the question) the player's score is 7 (6 talent strokes plus S&D).