One rule I would like to see changed.

[Mr. Bean]

Make all those areas as waste areas, there lies the solution.

[DaveLeeNC]

39 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

Make all those areas as waste areas, there lies the solution.

 

The solution may be in that concept, but those potential waste areas are everywhere. And most rational folks, I think, would see some of 'those areas' as being honest bunkers. So now rather than defining boundaries you are left with defining which areas fall in which category. The USGA seems to have dealt with this effectively in 2014. There are a number of higher level competitions held on this course and I don't know how they deal with this. 

 

dave

[davep043]

29 minutes ago, DaveLeeNC said:

 

The solution may be in that concept, but those potential waste areas are everywhere. And most rational folks, I think, would see some of 'those areas' as being honest bunkers. So now rather than defining boundaries you are left with defining which areas fall in which category. The USGA seems to have dealt with this effectively in 2014. There are a number of higher level competitions held on this course and I don't know how they deal with this. 

 

dave

Even in the photo you provided, I can see a differentiation between bunker and surrounding area, at least in the bunker closest to the camera.  Perhaps there's some rootmat in the natural areas that has been removed for the bunkers.  As you say, this was dealt with in 2014, and I know that other significant events have been held on Pinehurst courses since then.  The same issues will need to be addressed at Pine Needles next year.  The biggest potential problem I remember from my rounds over the last couple of weeks are the areas where the motorized rakes enter and leave the bunkers, the lip seems to be worn or become indistinct.  I'd assume that this will be solved by hand-raking all bunkers and allowing the lips to recover.

[sui generis]

Anyone mind if we "drift" even further from the OP's topic?

 

This is likely to become one of our eight Local Rules on January 1:

 

PENALTY AREAS All penalty areas are designated as red penalty areas and are marked with red stakes and/or red lines. However, for any penalty area with red stakes only, the edge of that red penalty area is defined by the adjacent mowing line.

 

Our course has several creeks and streams, all containing flowing water, which come into play on half the holes. Greenskeeping mows as close as they can to these small bodies of water. It's impractical to define the penalty areas by stakes alone and there's no appetite for painting more than a half a dozen times each season. Even then, the paint barely lasts a week until it's mowed away.

 

Committee Procedures now suggests that methods such as physical features may be used to define penalty area edges.

 

Does anyone else use anything similar?

 

 

[Halebopp]

1 hour ago, sui generis said:

Anyone mind if we "drift" even further from the OP's topic?

 

This is likely to become one of our eight Local Rules on January 1:

 

PENALTY AREAS All penalty areas are designated as red penalty areas and are marked with red stakes and/or red lines. However, for any penalty area with red stakes only, the edge of that red penalty area is defined by the adjacent mowing line.

 

Our course has several creeks and streams, all containing flowing water, which come into play on half the holes. Greenskeeping mows as close as they can to these small bodies of water. It's impractical to define the penalty areas by stakes alone and there's no appetite for painting more than a half a dozen times each season. Even then, the paint barely lasts a week until it's mowed away.

 

Committee Procedures now suggests that methods such as physical features may be used to define penalty area edges.

 

Does anyone else use anything similar?

 

 

 

A local course has one hole with an internal OB.  The areas cut to fairway height or shorter on the adjacent hole have been defined to be OB.

 

Before that there were stakes running through a wooded area from around 250 metres out all the way to the back of the green. It was changed for a pro tour event, in which I was working as an apprentice RO and the club decided to keep it that way.

[Mr. Bean]

5 hours ago, davep043 said:

 The biggest potential problem I remember from my rounds over the last couple of weeks are the areas where the motorized rakes enter and leave the bunkers, the lip seems to be worn or become indistinct.  I'd assume that this will be solved by hand-raking all bunkers and allowing the lips to recover.

 

Those are the ultimate problems everywhere and afaik there is no really accurate way to define the margin as you cannot put spray paint on sand. Around here one just crosses one's fingers and hopes for the best...

[denkea]

20 hours ago, sui generis said:

Anyone mind if we "drift" even further from the OP's topic?

 

This is likely to become one of our eight Local Rules on January 1:

 

PENALTY AREAS All penalty areas are designated as red penalty areas and are marked with red stakes and/or red lines. However, for any penalty area with red stakes only, the edge of that red penalty area is defined by the adjacent mowing line.

 

Our course has several creeks and streams, all containing flowing water, which come into play on half the holes. Greenskeeping mows as close as they can to these small bodies of water. It's impractical to define the penalty areas by stakes alone and there's no appetite for painting more than a half a dozen times each season. Even then, the paint barely lasts a week until it's mowed away.

 

Committee Procedures now suggests that methods such as physical features may be used to define penalty area edges.

 

Does anyone else use anything similar?

 

 

Sui ~~~ I'm having a bit of trouble understanding this.  It's my understanding that Red stakes denote the type of penalty area and not the boundary.  

Why would there need to be a differentiation between closely mown and not to define the penalty area boundary.  The boundary of the penalty area is covered in the rules if it is not defined by a red line.  

I guess the only need for this rule would be if the ball is plugged in the not closely mown area.  

[Newby]

1 hour ago, denkea said:

Sui ~~~ I'm having a bit of trouble understanding this.  It's my understanding that Red stakes denote the type of penalty area and not the boundary.  

Why would there need to be a differentiation between closely mown and not to define the penalty area boundary.  The boundary of the penalty area is covered in the rules if it is not defined by a red line.  

I guess the only need for this rule would be if the ball is plugged in the not closely mown area.  

From the Definition of Penalty Area:

 

The edge of a penalty area should be defined by stakes, lines or physical features:

• Stakes: When defined by stakes, the edge of the penalty area is defined by the line between the outside points of the stakes at ground level, and the stakes are inside the penalty area.

• Lines: When defined by a painted line on the ground, the edge of the penalty area is the outside edge of the line, and the line itself is in the penalty area.

• Physical Features: When defined by physical features (such as a beach or desert area or a retaining wall), the Committee should say how the edge of the penalty area is defined.

[Mr. Bean]

22 hours ago, sui generis said:

Anyone mind if we "drift" even further from the OP's topic?

 

This is likely to become one of our eight Local Rules on January 1:

 

PENALTY AREAS All penalty areas are designated as red penalty areas and are marked with red stakes and/or red lines. However, for any penalty area with red stakes only, the edge of that red penalty area is defined by the adjacent mowing line.

 

Our course has several creeks and streams, all containing flowing water, which come into play on half the holes. Greenskeeping mows as close as they can to these small bodies of water. It's impractical to define the penalty areas by stakes alone and there's no appetite for painting more than a half a dozen times each season. Even then, the paint barely lasts a week until it's mowed away.

 

Committee Procedures now suggests that methods such as physical features may be used to define penalty area edges.

 

Does anyone else use anything similar?

 

 

 

I wonder why it is impractical to use stakes. Before 2019 it would have made a difference if there was 'too much' dry area defined as PA (Loose Impediments, practice swings) but today I do not see any significant problem with that. Care to elaborate, Sui?

[Newby]

35 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

I wonder why it is impractical to use stakes. Before 2019 it would have made a difference if there was 'too much' dry area defined as PA (Loose Impediments, practice swings) but today I do not see any significant problem with that. Care to elaborate, Sui?

Yes. The 2019 relaxations made my committee (ie me) think about the margins of a couple of previously 'difficult' meandering streams.

Edited December 1, 2021 by Newby

[sui generis]

4 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

I wonder why it is impractical to use stakes. Before 2019 it would have made a difference if there was 'too much' dry area defined as PA (Loose Impediments, practice swings) but today I do not see any significant problem with that. Care to elaborate, Sui?

 

We're not buying hundreds more stakes and enduring the visual of having them at very short intervals along the "wavy" edges of the streams and then dealing with them knocked over by the mowers.

[Nels55]

9 minutes ago, sui generis said:

 

We're not buying hundreds more stakes and enduring the visual of having them at very short intervals along the "wavy" edges of the streams and then dealing with them knocked over by the mowers.

Yeah the mower guys at my low budget course don't seem to like pulling and replacing stakes while mowing.  Sometimes makes for some interesting penalty area boundaries

[Mr. Bean]

22 minutes ago, sui generis said:

 

We're not buying hundreds more stakes and enduring the visual of having them at very short intervals along the "wavy" edges of the streams and then dealing with them knocked over by the mowers.

 

Why follow the edges when you can make straight lines? One additional option is to use those 'furry' things that are anchored into the ground and mowers do not have to bother about them. They are used on some courses around here instead of stakes.

 

I must admit, though, that your system must look much more pleasant than the red stakes all over the place. It does pose some pressure to the staff when cutting the margins, I can imagine.

Edited December 1, 2021 by Mr. Bean

[rogolf]

While not an official local Rule at our course, most of our players do the same thing in casual/general play rounds - the stakes identify the penalty area as red or yellow and the mowing lines defines the edge of the penalty area.

For formal competitions (usually 3-5 per year), the Rules Committee for the event does paint lines.  Our greens crew don't have time (or knowledge) to paint lines - higher priority things to do!

[Mr. Bean]

30 minutes ago, rogolf said:

While not an official local Rule at our course, most of our players do the same thing in casual/general play rounds - the stakes identify the penalty area as red or yellow and the mowing lines defines the edge of the penalty area.

 

So you never have to drop in the rough when taking relief from a PA, is that it?

[rogolf]

1 hour ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

So you never have to drop in the rough when taking relief from a PA, is that it?

A supposition on your part, and no, that's not it.

The grass in the penalty area is hardly ever cut, the mowed rough (2 inches or so) borders the penalty area.  The closely-mown area (fairway) then edges the mowed rough, varying distances of mowed rough between edge of fairway and edge of penalty area.  Of course, if the player chooses back on the line relief from the penalty area, they can usually get to the fairway.

Edited December 2, 2021 by rogolf

[Nels55]

2 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

Why follow the edges when you can make straight lines? One additional option is to use those 'furry' things that are anchored into the ground and mowers do not have to bother about them. They are used on some courses around here instead of stakes.

 

I must admit, though, that your system must look much more pleasant than the red stakes all over the place. It does pose some pressure to the staff when cutting the margins, I can imagine.

I would like to know more about the furry things.  Do you have an online reference by any chance?

[Mr. Bean]

38 minutes ago, Nels55 said:

I would like to know more about the furry things.  Do you have an online reference by any chance?

 

I am afraid I wouldn't know the correct term even in Finnish to find those from the internet let alone in English.

 

Basically it is a tussle of nylon thread attached to a metal spike pushed into the ground. The tussle is visible but durable enough to resist the mower.

Edited December 2, 2021 by Mr. Bean

[davep043]

1 hour ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

I am afraid I wouldn't know the correct term even in Finnish to find those from the internet let alone in English.

 

Basically it is a tussle of nylon thread attached to a metal spike pushed into the ground. The tussle is visible but durable enough to resist the mower.

This could be it, I call them survey whiskers.  The nails are sold separately.

https://www.homedepot.com/p/Mutual-Industries-6-in-Glo-Orange-Stake-Whiskers-500-per-Box-15900-145/306650382?mtc=Shopping-B-F_D25T-B-D25T-025_001_HAND_TOOLS-NA-NA-NA-SMART-NA-NA-HandTools&cm_mmc=Shopping-B-F_D25T-B-D25T-025_001_HAND_TOOLS-NA-NA-NA-SMART-NA-NA-HandTools-71700000086134211-58700007341211183-92700065813630038&msclkid=6b2e2fea4aee13bbce074e426300226c&gclid=6b2e2fea4aee13bbce074e426300226c&gclsrc=3p.ds

 

[Mr. Bean]

10 minutes ago, davep043 said:

This could be it, I call them survey whiskers.  The nails are sold separately.

https://www.homedepot.com/p/Mutual-Industries-6-in-Glo-Orange-Stake-Whiskers-500-per-Box-15900-145/306650382?mtc=Shopping-B-F_D25T-B-D25T-025_001_HAND_TOOLS-NA-NA-NA-SMART-NA-NA-HandTools&cm_mmc=Shopping-B-F_D25T-B-D25T-025_001_HAND_TOOLS-NA-NA-NA-SMART-NA-NA-HandTools-71700000086134211-58700007341211183-92700065813630038&msclkid=6b2e2fea4aee13bbce074e426300226c&gclid=6b2e2fea4aee13bbce074e426300226c&gclsrc=3p.ds

 

 

Those are certainly one version but looks more rigid and upright than the ones I have seen around here. But the concept is the same.

[rogolf]

10 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

Those are certainly one version but looks more rigid and upright than the ones I have seen around here. But the concept is the same.

I don't see those surviving a rotary mower.  And they would likely leave quite a mess as a result of that encounter!  Maybe the ones you've seen are after a rotary mower has run over them?

Edited December 2, 2021 by rogolf

[Mr. Bean]

11 minutes ago, rogolf said:

I don't see those surviving a rotary mower.  And they would likely leave quite a mess as a result of that encounter!  Maybe the ones you've seen are after a rotary mower has run over them?

 

How did you put it... 'A supposition on your part, and no, that's not it' 😉

[jobin]

I think the Rules defining a red PA need a bit of tightening up.  When the PA is defined only by red stakes, the current reading is ' the edge is defined by the line between the outside points...'  But in fact, there is no such line; only an imaginary straight line between the 2 nearest stakes.

I have found that red stakes only, and at a far distance between any 2, leads to disagreements over 'where is the edge?'.

[2bGood]

9 minutes ago, jobin said:

I think the Rules defining a red PA need a bit of tightening up.  When the PA is defined only by red stakes, the current reading is ' the edge is defined by the line between the outside points...'  But in fact, there is no such line; only an imaginary straight line between the 2 nearest stakes.

I have found that red stakes only, and at a far distance between any 2, leads to disagreements over 'where is the edge?'.

Curious how you would change this rule? In a perfect world all courses would be required to paint and maintain a painted line. But that is not realistic. 

 

So we are left with sighting down the line - what is your suggestion of how this could be done better?

[ThinkingPlus]

2 minutes ago, 2bGood said:

Curious how you would change this rule? In a perfect world all courses would be required to paint and maintain a painted line. But that is not realistic. 

 

So we are left with sighting down the line - what is your suggestion of how this could be done better?

Best fit curve using piecewise splines...

[Nels55]

1 hour ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Best fit curve using piecewise splines...

Nah, that's too simple...

[2bGood]

1 hour ago, jobin said:

I think the Rules defining a red PA need a bit of tightening up.  When the PA is defined only by red stakes, the current reading is ' the edge is defined by the line between the outside points...'  But in fact, there is no such line; only an imaginary straight line between the 2 nearest stakes.

I have found that red stakes only, and at a far distance between any 2, leads to disagreements over 'where is the edge?'.

I guess the other thing I should ask you is why you care specifically about red penalty areas?

 

If you can find your ball and it is near the line it would almost never make a difference wether you are in or out of the PA. You can play the ball as it lies and even ground your club in the PA. I you don't like your lie I guess it matters in the language you use to take relief (unplayable v penalty relief) but both cost you a stroke and have the same relief options. If we are going to get real fussy the 2 club length from where the ball lies v 2 club length from the PA may have an inch difference for ball so close to the line it can not be easily determined if it was in or out.

 

The one instance where I can think of that determining in or out of the PA is if there is abnormal course condition you want free relief from.

 

As for OB stakes - that is where knowing if you are in or out really matters.  

 

 

Edited December 2, 2021 by 2bGood

[rogolf]

Referees carry a string that go from stake to stake to decide the edge when there are no painted lines.  I carry my string on a fishing reel, with about 100 yards of line.  It works very well, also good for defining the equidistant arc (no closer to the hole) for TIOs and other relief situations.

When refereeing in provincial (synonym for state), national and professional championships, "close enough is not good enough".

Edited December 2, 2021 by rogolf

[Mr. Bean]

1 hour ago, jobin said:

I think the Rules defining a red PA need a bit of tightening up.  When the PA is defined only by red stakes, the current reading is ' the edge is defined by the line between the outside points...'  But in fact, there is no such line; only an imaginary straight line between the 2 nearest stakes.

 

So there IS a line...

[Newby]

5 hours ago, jobin said:

I think the Rules defining a red PA need a bit of tightening up.  When the PA is defined only by red stakes, the current reading is ' the edge is defined by the line between the outside points...'  But in fact, there is no such line; only an imaginary straight line between the 2 nearest stakes.

I have found that red stakes only, and at a far distance between any 2, leads to disagreements over 'where is the edge?'.

It is not imaginary but cannot be seen.

In geometry, a line is a one-dimensional figure that has no thickness or width