drop but find original ball

[djmohab2]

So I had the most ridiculous situation today. Par 4, dogleg right, with a cart path and then a wash all down the right side marked with red stakes. I was trying to hit a baby draw 5-wood to take going through the dogleg out of the equation and I hit a high push right on the cart path line. Seeing the ball bounce twice and then kick right, I looked for the ball in the landing area to no avail. I reasonably assumed I went in the wash, and dropped on an agreed, with my playing partners, point of entry. I then holed out from 160 yards out with an 8-iron for birdie. But then traversing further down the cart path, somehow I must have gotten a ridiculous bounce forward because I found the original ball almost around the corner. 

As far as I understand, as soon as I dropped, that took the original tee shot out of play. But then, did I take an illegal drop? From what I read, it depends on the certainly in which you believe you were in the hazard. If you couldn't say for certain, the right play would have been to re-tee as a lost ball. But we were certain that it must have entered the hazard and I played the hole out under that ruling. Any thoughts?

[antip]

The decision criterion under the rule is did you have Knowledge or Virtual Certainty (defined as 95 per cent probability or above) that the ball was in the penalty area. On your description, the answer is yes.

Consequently, when you dropped that new ball into play, the original ball could have no further relevance to the hole, regardless of where or when it is found (with one bizarre exception - if it is actually in the hole). So your score of 3 counts. All sorts of diabolicals commence if the player then continues play with the original ball as it has become as a wrong ball.

[Colin L]

1 hour ago, antip said:

... (with one bizarre exception - if it is actually in the hole). 

 

I'd welcome that kind of  bizarre any time. 

[nsxguy]

10 hours ago, djmohab2 said:

So I had the most ridiculous situation today. Par 4, dogleg right, with a cart path and then a wash all down the right side marked with red stakes. I was trying to hit a baby draw 5-wood to take going through the dogleg out of the equation and I hit a high push right on the cart path line. Seeing the ball bounce twice and then kick right, I looked for the ball in the landing area to no avail. I reasonably assumed I went in the wash, and dropped on an agreed, with my playing partners, point of entry. I then holed out from 160 yards out with an 8-iron for birdie. But then traversing further down the cart path, somehow I must have gotten a ridiculous bounce forward because I found the original ball almost around the corner. 

As far as I understand, as soon as I dropped, that took the original tee shot out of play. But then, did I take an illegal drop? From what I read, it depends on the certainly in which you believe you were in the hazard. If you couldn't say for certain, the right play would have been to re-tee as a lost ball. But we were certain that it must have entered the hazard and I played the hole out under that ruling. Any thoughts?

 

9 hours ago, antip said:

The decision criterion under the rule is did you have Knowledge or Virtual Certainty (defined as 95 per cent probability or above) that the ball was in the penalty area. On your description, the answer is yes.

Consequently, when you dropped that new ball into play, the original ball could have no further relevance to the hole, regardless of where or when it is found (with one bizarre exception - if it is actually in the hole). So your score of 3 counts. All sorts of diabolicals commence if the player then continues play with the original ball as it has become as a wrong ball.

 

My friends, the "quote" button (and bolding) is your (and our) friend. And no, I won't go so far as suggesting using emojis.

 

To which of the OP's questions are you saying "Yes" to ? He only asked 2.

 

Pedants should be especially clear and cognizant on what they're saying and answering, especially in the Rules Forum, no ?

 

I know, I know, you did get the "ruling" correct but,,,,,,,,,,, 🙃

 

 

 

[Newby]

1 hour ago, nsxguy said:

 

 

My friends, the "quote" button (and bolding) is your (and our) friend. And no, I won't go so far as suggesting using emojis.

 

To which of the OP's questions are you saying "Yes" to ? He only asked 2.

 

Pedants should be especially clear and cognizant on what they're saying and answering, especially in the Rules Forum, no ?

 

I know, I know, you did get the "ruling" correct but,,,,,,,,,,, 🙃

 

 

 

.... did you have Knowledge or Virtual Certainty (defined as 95 per cent probability or above) that the ball was in the penalty area. 

On your description, the answer is yes. 

 

Looks like a question and answer to me.

Edited September 19, 2021 by Newby

[nsxguy]

4 hours ago, Newby said:

.... did you have Knowledge or Virtual Certainty (defined as 95 per cent probability or above) that the ball was in the penalty area. 

On your description, the answer is yes. 

 

Looks like a question and answer to me.

 

Of course the poster he was answering never asked that question (either). 

 

So antip was asking and answering his own question then ?

 

OK, my bad.

 

 

[sui generis]

11 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Of course the poster he was answering never asked that question (either). 

 

So antip was asking and answering his own question then ?

 

OK, my bad.

 

 

 

The OP's "Any thoughts?" requires the establishment of KVC. Without that predicate, there is no satisfactory answer. 🙂

[antip]

10 hours ago, nsxguy said:

 

 

My friends, the "quote" button (and bolding) is your (and our) friend. And no, I won't go so far as suggesting using emojis.

 

To which of the OP's questions are you saying "Yes" to ? He only asked 2.

 

Pedants should be especially clear and cognizant on what they're saying and answering, especially in the Rules Forum, no ?

 

I know, I know, you did get the "ruling" correct but,,,,,,,,,,, 🙃

 

 

 

Thank you for your thoughts NSX, always happy to hear constructive suggestions. 

 

Perhaps you are reading the purpose/intent/request in the OP differently than me. I responded to the entirety of the (relatively common - except for the holed 8 iron) story but explicitly to the invitation "Any thoughts?" I provided, very precisely, my thoughts.

 

And, of course, what gets pitched into a rules discussion forum is not a ruling process on the course.

[Colin L]

6 hours ago, nsxguy said:

OK, my bad. 

 

 

I wouldn't argue with that.

[djmohab2]

On 9/18/2021 at 11:03 PM, antip said:

The decision criterion under the rule is did you have Knowledge or Virtual Certainty (defined as 95 per cent probability or above) that the ball was in the penalty area. On your description, the answer is yes.

Consequently, when you dropped that new ball into play, the original ball could have no further relevance to the hole, regardless of where or when it is found (with one bizarre exception - if it is actually in the hole). So your score of 3 counts. All sorts of diabolicals commence if the player then continues play with the original ball as it has become as a wrong ball.

 

Thank you. This is what I was looking for, whether I established proper Knowledge or Visual Certainty in taking the drop. I appreciate the explanation.