Rule Clarifications

[nsxguy]

4 hours ago, Halebopp said:

@nsxguy

@Schulzmc

 

Let's go over this once more. nsx said:

 

 

Nsx's comment implies a player is allowed to play a provisional ball every time a ball might have come to rest in the General Area. I replied that nsx is missing essential parts of the rule, which I quoted above. Players need a valid reason, the possibility of a ball being lost outside of a PA or for it to be OB, to play a provisional ball.

 

After that schultz came up with a completely different argument about a ball being possibly lost outside of a PA. That's an issue I haven't even touched in this thread. The only thing I've commented on is that particular piece written by nsx. Either you're trying to put words in my mouth or you don't understand the rule.

 

But I have other things to do now, so I bid you farewell for now.

 

Let's keep my quote in context please. I didn't say nor imply that.

 

As others have mentioned, if a player can track his ball's flight and see it after it stops it is not reasonable to believe it lost. So no, I don't think a player "is allowed to play a provisional ball every time a ball might have come to rest in the General Area"

 

But that aside, my comment(s) were about the ball skipping in the water and possibly coming out.

 

This is the post I responded to (from the OP) "You hit a ball that you see splash it the water, but think there is a chance it may have skipped to safety on the other side.  However you didn't see it land on the other side and can't be sure. 

 

Are you allowed to take a provisional for a ball that might be safe on the other side, or might be at the bottom of the pond?"

 

I responded by pasting 18.3 (when you can play a prov) and bolded "If a ball might be lost outside a penalty area" and,,,,,,,,, "When a ball might be lost in a penalty area but also might be lost somewhere else on the course."

 

The OP then confirmed that WAS the question (skipping out of the PA).

 

YOU then said "Yes, if the only place in which the ball could've been lost was the Penalty Area, there was no right to play a provisional ball."

 

Nobody said the only place it could be was IN the PA.

 

So the OP asked again and THAT is when I replied with "MIGHT it be outside of the PA in the GA on the other side ???

 

If the answer is YES, you may hit a provisional."

 

The YOU tell me I'm "missing the essential parts of the rule and quote the rules with "If a ball might be lost outside a penalty area or be out of bounds, to save time the player may play another ball provisionally under penalty of stroke and distance (see Rule 14.6)"

 

That rule is saying exactly what I've been saying "if the ball MIGHT be outside the PA he may hit a provisional".

 

That's as much of the thread that I'll re-post (you're ALL welcome ).

 

Any (other) questions/observations, please feel free,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

 

 

 

[Augster]

Wow. There’s a lot of talking past each other in this thread. 
 

We all agree a provisional ball “might” be legal if the ball could be in the PA, or it may have skipped out of the PA and be in play. The provisional ball is “only” legal if the ball may have skipped out of the PA AND ALSO “might” be lost. Possibly skipping out of the PA isn’t grounds enough for a legal provisional ball.
 

The ball has to possibly skip out of the PA AND also might be lost on the other side to make a provisional ball legal. Merely skipping out of the PA isn’t enough for a legal provisional ball. 
 

I hope that clarifies the misunderstandings I’m reading throughout this thread. 

[rogolf]

How can we all read the same Rule(s) and come up with so many arguments?  There is only one set of Rules worldwide - are different cultures somehow involved?  Why?  The common Rules should be commonly applied.

[nsxguy]

39 minutes ago, Augster said:

Wow. There’s a lot of talking past each other in this thread. 
 

We all agree a provisional ball “might” be legal if the ball could be in the PA, or it may have skipped out of the PA and be in play. The provisional ball is “only” legal if the ball may have skipped out of the PA AND ALSO “might” be lost. Possibly skipping out of the PA isn’t grounds enough for a legal provisional ball.
 

The ball has to possibly skip out of the PA AND also might be lost on the other side to make a provisional ball legal. Merely skipping out of the PA isn’t enough for a legal provisional ball. 
 

I hope that clarifies the misunderstandings I’m reading throughout this thread. 

 

Agree. If the ball is SEEN at rest after it skips out of a PA there is no need to hit a prov. It is then NOT lost outside a PA.

 

If the ball MAY or may not have skipped out and is NOT seen at rest, it MAY be lost outside of the PA and a prov is permitted.

 

If the ball is clearly IN the PA, no provisional.

 

I really don't see any ambiguity in 18.3

[Colin L]

4 hours ago, nsxguy said:

 

Agree. If the ball is SEEN at rest after it skips out of a PA there is no need to hit a prov. It is then NOT lost outside a PA.

 

If the ball MAY or may not have skipped out and is NOT seen at rest, it MAY be lost outside of the PA and a prov is permitted.

 

If the ball is clearly IN the PA, no provisional.

 

I really don't see any ambiguity in 18.3

There's a good reason why you don't see any ambiguity in 18.3. 😉

 

Enough was said within a few posts to have clarified the matter for the OP who has gone silent.  Perhaps he is away searching in vain for Rule 18.3 in the 2016 Rules.

 

Just one thing to add, a plea to keep the terminology right.  The ball which may or may not be in the penalty area is in play regardless.  Going into a penalty area doesn't put it out of play only for it to come back into play if it bounces or skips out again.  If it stays in the penalty area, it is in play.  

Edited October 18, 2022 by Colin L

[Halebopp]

5 hours ago, nsxguy said:

 

Let's keep my quote in context please. I didn't say nor imply that.

 

As others have mentioned, if a player can track his ball's flight and see it after it stops it is not reasonable to believe it lost. So no, I don't think a player "is allowed to play a provisional ball every time a ball might have come to rest in the General Area"

 

But that aside, my comment(s) were about the ball skipping in the water and possibly coming out.

 

This is the post I responded to (from the OP) "You hit a ball that you see splash it the water, but think there is a chance it may have skipped to safety on the other side.  However you didn't see it land on the other side and can't be sure. 

 

Are you allowed to take a provisional for a ball that might be safe on the other side, or might be at the bottom of the pond?"

 

I responded by pasting 18.3 (when you can play a prov) and bolded "If a ball might be lost outside a penalty area" and,,,,,,,,, "When a ball might be lost in a penalty area but also might be lost somewhere else on the course."

 

The OP then confirmed that WAS the question (skipping out of the PA).

 

YOU then said "Yes, if the only place in which the ball could've been lost was the Penalty Area, there was no right to play a provisional ball."

 

Nobody said the only place it could be was IN the PA.

 

So the OP asked again and THAT is when I replied with "MIGHT it be outside of the PA in the GA on the other side ???

 

If the answer is YES, you may hit a provisional."

 

The YOU tell me I'm "missing the essential parts of the rule and quote the rules with "If a ball might be lost outside a penalty area or be out of bounds, to save time the player may play another ball provisionally under penalty of stroke and distance (see Rule 14.6)"

 

That rule is saying exactly what I've been saying "if the ball MIGHT be outside the PA he may hit a provisional".

 

That's as much of the thread that I'll re-post (you're ALL welcome ).

 

Any (other) questions/observations, please feel free,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

You did say exactly that in this post.

 

You're agreeing with the Rules of Golf in your second paragraph but, soon afterwards you write this:

Quote

 

That rule is saying exactly what I've been saying "if the ball MIGHT be outside the PA he may hit a provisional".

 

 

That's contradicting yourself previously saying you don't believe that a provisional is allowed any time a ball might be outside of a Penalty Area. One more time, a provisional ball is allowed only if there's a reasonable chance the ball is OB or lost outside of a PA. The mere possibility of a ball being outside a PA does not automatically give a plyer the right to play a provisional ball.

 

But I think I'm done with this one. Hopefully Girevik, and anyone wanting to learn about the rules, ignores what has been written after my first post in this thread.

[Schulzmc]

7 hours ago, Halebopp said:

a provisional ball is allowed only if there's a reasonable chance

That's not what the rules say. There is nothing about a "reasonable" chance - only if it "might" be lost.

[Colin L]

7 hours ago, Halebopp said:

 

....... Hopefully Girevik, and anyone wanting to learn about the rules, ignores what has been written after my first post in this thread.

 

I, for one, would be disappointed if they did. 😟

[nsxguy]

8 hours ago, Halebopp said:

 

That's contradicting yourself previously saying you don't believe that a provisional is allowed any time a ball might be outside of a Penalty Area. One more time, a provisional ball is allowed only if there's a reasonable chance the ball is OB or lost outside of a PA. The mere possibility of a ball being outside a PA does not automatically give a plyer the right to play a provisional ball.

 

There is NO contradiction there.

 

Once again, CONTEXT. I even BOLDED the part of the OP's post that I was referring to "or had skipped out of the water and was safely in play.  So based on the rule that is NOT case where a provisional could be played, correct? "

 

He's talking about the ball skipping out of the PA and not seeing where it came to rest. The "not seeing it" is implied in the last sentence of the post I quoted but did NOT bold, "They would have had to drive up and look for the ball and go back if they couldn't find it"

 

THAT is what I was directly referring to and answering when I said "MIGHT it be outside of the PA in the GA on the other side ???

 

If the answer is YES, you may hit a provisional".

 

It was never intended to be taken for ANY situation and I don't believe I ever stated, nor inferred, it was. It was directly referring to the ball skipping out of a PA.

 

I can't explain it any clearer.

 

 

Edited October 18, 2022 by nsxguy

[nsxguy]

8 hours ago, Colin L said:

There's a good reason why you don't see any ambiguity in 18.3. 😉

 

Enough was said within a few posts to have clarified the matter for the OP who has gone silent.  Perhaps he is away searching in vain for Rule 18.3 in the 2016 Rules.

 

Just one thing to add, a plea to keep the terminology right.  The ball which may or may not be in the penalty area is in play regardless.  Going into a penalty area doesn't put it out of play only for it to come back into play if it bounces or skips out again.  If it stays in the penalty area, it is in play.  

 

Agreed. Just one thing though. Was your "in play" comment directed to me ? Or just to the group in general ?

 

I don't recall using the term "in play" at all. Did I ?

[Colin L]

1 hour ago, nsxguy said:

 

Agreed. Just one thing though. Was your "in play" comment directed to me ? Or just to the group in general ?

 

I don't recall using the term "in play" at all. Did I ?

Well, if you want to take the rap, feel free.😀 

 

 But no, there were some comments which seemed to imply that ball would be out of   play if it were in the penalty area, starting with the OP:

They thought the ball might be lost INSIDE a penalty area, or might have skipped out of the penalty area and be in play. There was no concern that it hit the water, came back into play, and then became lost outside the penalty area.

[Halebopp]

2 hours ago, nsxguy said:

 

There is NO contradiction there.

 

Once again, CONTEXT. I even BOLDED the part of the OP's post that I was referring to "or had skipped out of the water and was safely in play.  So based on the rule that is NOT case where a provisional could be played, correct? "

 

He's talking about the ball skipping out of the PA and not seeing where it came to rest. The "not seeing it" is implied in the last sentence of the post I quoted but did NOT bold, "They would have had to drive up and look for the ball and go back if they couldn't find it"

 

THAT is what I was directly referring to and answering when I said "MIGHT it be outside of the PA in the GA on the other side ???

 

If the answer is YES, you may hit a provisional".

 

It was never intended to be taken for ANY situation and I don't believe I ever stated, nor inferred, it was. It was directly referring to the ball skipping out of a PA.

 

I can't explain it any clearer.

 

Ok, I probably missed the whole idea that you'd be talking about this particular case as opposed to the rules in general. We weren't there so we can't know the exact details of the situation, so it didn't even cross my mind someone would start to give a  precise ruling. The only thing we can do is explain the rule and let the person make his/her own judgement based on that.

 

That being said, I can't recall a single mention of the ball being possibly lost outside of the PA, in fact only description of the possible status of the ball, if outside of the PA is "safely in play", which in my opinon, would imply the chances of the ball being lost outside of the PA to be slim to none. But we don't know the details to say one way or the other.

[nsxguy]

59 minutes ago, Halebopp said:

 

Ok, I probably missed the whole idea that you'd be talking about this particular case as opposed to the rules in general. We weren't there so we can't know the exact details of the situation, so it didn't even cross my mind someone would start to give a  precise ruling. The only thing we can do is explain the rule and let the person make his/her own judgement based on that.

 

That being said, I can't recall a single mention of the ball being possibly lost outside of the PA, in fact only description of the possible status of the ball, if outside of the PA is "safely in play", which in my opinon, would imply the chances of the ball being lost outside of the PA to be slim to none. But we don't know the details to say one way or the other.

 

OK, so a misunderstanding.

 

No sweat. Glad we resolved it. 👍

[Girevik]

11 hours ago, Colin L said:

 

 

Enough was said within a few posts to have clarified the matter for the OP who has gone silent.  Perhaps he is away searching in vain for Rule 18.3 in the 2016 Rules.

 

Sorry, I logged off for the night yesterday and am just getting a break to check back.  Not sure what I've done to deserve the snide comments, but my deepest apologies for whatever it was.

 

All I will add is that given the layout of the hole, there is no reasonable way that the ball could have come out of the water and been lost elsewhere.  But when anything is possible "might" is a mighty broad term. "Might" it have rolled into a mouse hole on the fairway?

 

However, given the spirit of the provisional ball rule this seems like a perfectly justifiable situation to hit a potentially time saving ball.  The bigger part of my question was bout our opponents' obligation, if any, to inform us they hit a provisional before we took our stroke (they did say they talked about coming over to tell us but chose not to). 

[nsxguy]

35 minutes ago, Girevik said:

Sorry, I logged off for the night yesterday and am just getting a break to check back.  Not sure what I've done to deserve the snide comments, but my deepest apologies for whatever it was.

 

All I will add is that given the layout of the hole, there is no reasonable way that the ball could have come out of the water and been lost elsewhere.  But when anything is possible "might" is a mighty broad term. "Might" it have rolled into a mouse hole on the fairway?

 

However, given the spirit of the provisional ball rule this seems like a perfectly justifiable situation to hit a potentially time saving ball.  The bigger part of my question was bout our opponents' obligation, if any, to inform us they hit a provisional before we took our stroke (they did say they talked about coming over to tell us but chose not to). 

 

OK, firstly, Colin was only messin' wit ya. He's from the UK. 'nuff said.

 

But usually, when somebody starts a thread, especially with multiple questions, they come back time and again to see the answers. No biggie though. Stuff happens.

 

Secondly, your posts have pretty much confused everybody. But multiple Rules guys here emphasized the word "might" (be lost outside a penalty area) in 18.3 Another(?) one of them commented that "might" is a pretty low bar and others agreed with him. And you do as well.

 

But now you're saying "there is no reasonable way that the ball could have come out of the water and been lost elsewhere" ?

 

Seriously ? Earlier you said "They thought the ball might be lost INSIDE a penalty area, or might have skipped out of the penalty area and be in paly"

 

There's your "might be lost outside a penalty area".

 

So which is it ? No chance or might have skipped out ? The answer to that with 95% certainty is the answer to your question.

 

The final part was discussed as well. It would have be nice, even somewhat "appropriate" for them to call over to you and tell you about the provisional, but not required under the circumstances.

 

 

Edited October 18, 2022 by nsxguy

[Schulzmc]

14 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

The final part was discussed as well. It would have be nice, even somewhat "appropriate" for them to call over to you and tell you about the provisional, but not required under the circumstances.

 

And I would add not required under the rules.

[Girevik]

I did come back a couple of times last evening and saw nothing that asked for clarification so just read other's comments.  Then was busy at work today and didn't get back to check this afternoon.

 

  

16 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

 

But now you're saying "there is no reasonable way that the ball could have come out of the water and been lost elsewhere" ?

 

Seriously ? Earlier you said "They thought the ball might be lost INSIDE a penalty area, or might have skipped out of the penalty area and be in paly"

 

There's your "might be lost outside a penalty area".

 

Sorry, I don't see the contradiction.   If it came out of the water, the only place that it could have reasonably ended up was the green, the fairway, a sand trap, or the edge of the rough around one of those areas.  I don't think there is any REASONABLE way that if it had come out of the water it could have been "lost" elsewhere.  There was no tall grass, leaves, uber thick rough, etc.

 

If the ball was in play it would be easily findable (and was).  But if you replace the idea of  "reasonable" with "might", then that opens up a hole multiverse of possibilities.  The ball my partner just hit down the middle of the fairway MIGHT have rolled into a gopher hole.  My eyesight is rarely good enough see a ball on the fairway a couple hundred yards out, so who knows what "might" happen by the time I get there.

 

I apologize if my posts have been confusing.

[sui generis]

This Interpretation is worthy of our consideration:

 

18.3b/1 – What Is Considered Announcement of Provisional Ball

Although Rule 18.3b does not specify to whom the announcement of a provisional ball must be made, an announcement must be made so that people in the vicinity of the player can hear it.

 

For example, with other people nearby, if a player states that he or she will be playing a provisional ball but does so in a way that only he or she can hear it, this does not satisfy the requirement in Rule 18.3b that the player must “announce” that he or she is going to play a provisional ball. Any ball played in these circumstances becomes the player’s ball in play under penalty of stroke and distance.

 

If there are no other people nearby to hear the player’s announcement (such as when a player has returned to the teeing area after briefly searching for his or her ball), the player is considered to have correctly announced that he or she has the intent to play a provisional ball provided that he or she informs someone of that when it becomes possible to do so.

[Colin L]

Ahem.  That was referred to a wee while ago 😇.   

[Colin L]

42 minutes ago, Girevik said:

I did come back a couple of times last evening and saw nothing that asked for clarification so just read other's comments.  Then was busy at work today and didn't get back to check this afternoon.

 

  

 

Sorry, I don't see the contradiction.   If it came out of the water, the only place that it could have reasonably ended up was the green, the fairway, a sand trap, or the edge of the rough around one of those areas.  I don't think there is any REASONABLE way that if it had come out of the water it could have been "lost" elsewhere.  There was no tall grass, leaves, uber thick rough, etc.

 

If the ball was in play it would be easily findable (and was).  But if you replace the idea of  "reasonable" with "might", then that opens up a hole multiverse of possibilities.  The ball my partner just hit down the middle of the fairway MIGHT have rolled into a gopher hole.  My eyesight is rarely good enough see a ball on the fairway a couple hundred yards out, so who knows what "might" happen by the time I get there.

 

I apologize if my posts have been confusing.

Your view that the ball would be found outside the penalty area is  obviously based on a knowledge of the course.  Did your opponents have the same knowledge?  If they weren't knowledgeable of what lay beyond the pond, or perhaps whether the reeds were in or outside the penalty area, they have obvious justification for  a provisional.   They might have a different idea of the flight of their ball or not seen it clearly.  They might have a different idea of the rough you mention around the green,  bunkers and fairway.  It's their perspective that matters as it's their call.

 

 

[Colin L]

2 hours ago, Girevik said:

Sorry, I logged off for the night yesterday and am just getting a break to check back.  Not sure what I've done to deserve the snide comments, but my deepest apologies for whatever it was.

 

All I will add is that given the layout of the hole, there is no reasonable way that the ball could have come out of the water and been lost elsewhere.  But when anything is possible "might" is a mighty broad term. "Might" it have rolled into a mouse hole on the fairway?

 

However, given the spirit of the provisional ball rule this seems like a perfectly justifiable situation to hit a potentially time saving ball.  The bigger part of my question was bout our opponents' obligation, if any, to inform us they hit a provisional before we took our stroke (they did say they talked about coming over to tell us but chose not to). 

No intention of being snide.  It was just a jokey reference to your apparently being unaware of the 2019 Rules.

 

I hope my explanation of your opponents' obligations and the account of the Interpretation which sui generis has now quoted verbatim helped with the bigger question. I hope you've picked up on the point that you could/should have asked your opponents how many strokes they had taken.  Just give us a shout if anything is still unclear.

 

Edited October 18, 2022 by Colin L

[Newby]

30 minutes ago, Colin L said:

 It's their perspective that matters as it's their call.

 

As I posted in another thread:

See Rule 1.3b(2)

Accepting Player’s “Reasonable Judgment” in Determining a Location When Applying the Rules.

 

So long as the player does what can be reasonably expected under the circumstances to make an accurate determination, the player’s reasonable judgment will be accepted even if, after the stroke is made, the determination is shown to be wrong by video evidence or other information.

 

[Girevik]

15 hours ago, Colin L said:

Your view that the ball would be found outside the penalty area is  obviously based on a knowledge of the course.  Did your opponents have the same knowledge?  If they weren't knowledgeable of what lay beyond the pond, or perhaps whether the reeds were in or outside the penalty area, they have obvious justification for  a provisional.   They might have a different idea of the flight of their ball or not seen it clearly.  They might have a different idea of the rough you mention around the green,  bunkers and fairway.  It's their perspective that matters as it's their call.

 

 

 

It never occurred to my partner or me that it was anywhere else BUT the water.  We never saw it skip and would have bet significant sums of money it was wet.  IIRC our opponents went to the ball and said something to the effect of "we weren't sure if it came out or not, but knew it would be right here if it did".   There was zero trouble anywhere outside the water.

 

Seems to me this is a valid reason for a provisional that could be added, but as long as you can use "might" to the extreme you can make literally any ball you can't see from where you stand viable for a provisional.  I was willing to let them play the original ball, so I'm not all that concern about whether or not our opponents were justified in this case (but would be happy to continue to try to clarify this situation if others are interested).  I just wanted to be sure I understood the rule and believe I do.

 

  

15 hours ago, Colin L said:

No intention of being snide.  It was just a jokey reference to your apparently being unaware of the 2019 Rules.

I'm well aware of the new rules.  When I was Googling for interpretations, I apparently pulled up something that was not current and didn't notice. Mea culpa.

[dmecca2]

https://firepitcollective.com/the-worst-q-school-dq-you-have-ever-heard-so-far/

 

Crazy how right after reading this thread, I see this story about a player in the second stage of Q-School who hit a provisional for a ball that skipped through the water, found and played the original ball, then was DQ'd an hour after the round. Situation is a little different than OP's, so the DQ is warranted, but still cool to see a similar situation play out professionally.

 

EDIT: After reading OP's description, his situation seems very similar to this one. I don't think a provisional ball should have been allowed

Edited October 19, 2022 by dmecca2

[North Butte]

On 10/17/2022 at 8:58 PM, rogolf said:

How can we all read the same Rule(s) and come up with so many arguments?  There is only one set of Rules worldwide - are different cultures somehow involved?  Why?  The common Rules should be commonly applied.

Because when parsed to this level everything about the Rules of Golf is open to endless disputation and argumentation. Always has been. 
 

So are we surprised that 99% of the rounds of golf played today will be played while ignoring large swaths of the Rules of Golf? Most people who play golf for recreation look at the Rules as a set of broad guidelines, not something to be taken seriously. Because if you do take them seriously you ultimately end up going down rabbit holes like this thread or arguing over the precise definitions of “might” vs “may”. 

[Colin L]

2 hours ago, Girevik said:

I'm well aware of the new rules.  When I was Googling for interpretations, I apparently pulled up something that was not current and didn't notice. Mea culpa.

Understood.   Mr Google isn't always up to date.  You'd be better going here,

https://www.randa.org/rog/the-rules-of-golf

or here,

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

 

[Girevik]

Yes, that's the starting point but I didn't see an example that quite matched what I was looking for so I was hoping to find a similar situation given an interpretation.   Evidently in my haste / exhaustion at the time I didn't pay close enough attention and caught one for the old rule.

[Augster]

5 hours ago, Girevik said:

 

 

 

Seems to me this is a valid reason for a provisional that could be added, but as long as you can use "might" to the extreme you can make literally any ball you can't see from where you stand viable for a provisional.  

Now you are getting it. 
 

The biggest caveat is that you need to KNOW the rule to use the rule. 
 

If you say, “That’s probably in the PA, I’ll hit a provisional”, that’s completely wrong and illegal. 
 

BUT if you say, “That’s probably in the PA, but it MIGHT have hit something, or I didn’t look at it correctly, or it might have skipped out, AND the ball MIGHT be lost outside the PA because I don’t even know where to begin looking, I’ll hit a provisional.” Totally legal. 
 

The word “might” is intentionally vague in 18.3A to give a player the option to use it almost all the time. 18.3A is there to speed up play. It takes 30 seconds to hit a provisional. It takes minutes to walk back to the tee and rehit. The term “to save time” is literally in the Rule. 
 

The use of a provisional ball is to be encouraged. Frankly, in the new Rules, I hope they fix this to ALWAYS allow a provisional ball if the ball might not be found ANYWHERE. 
 

One can dream. 

[Colin L]

2 hours ago, Augster said:

 

The use of a provisional ball is to be encouraged. Frankly, in the new Rules, I hope they fix this to ALWAYS allow a provisional ball if the ball might not be found ANYWHERE. 

What would be the point of allowing a "provisional" if you know your ball is in a penalty area.  A provisional ball is played provisionally  in advance of the stroke and distance that is the sole  procedure if your ball is OOB or lost.  If you know your ball is in a penalty area, you know you have to follow  the procedure for a penalty area, a procedure which gives you three of four choices. depending on colour.  If you play another ball from where you made your last stroke, it is a commitment to one of those choices.  You have made your choice.

 

Also, bear in mind that a provisional is not permitted only when you know your ball is in the PA,  only when you know you are going to have the choices .   Knowing is a certainty; knowing is having no doubt; knowing is not the same as virtual certainty with its 5% uncertainty.   A provisional arrangement is a "just in case'" shot.  if you know your ball is in a PA, what`' just in case is there?.  In case you are wrong and it's not in the PA? If that's a possibility, then you don't know your ball is in the PA and you are back to a provisional being allowable.

 

 

[North Butte]

20 years ago I was a member of a course with a peninsula green Par 3. There was a thin strip of rough (2-3’ wide maybe?) between the back edge of the green and the sleepers holding the green complex a few feet above the water. Think the back edge of #17 green at TPC Sawgrass. 
 

When a ball bounced or rolled off the back of the green it was totally blind and there was no way to know if the ball was in the hazard (re-tee) or had stopped in the rough (simple chip shot). Nobody in his right mind was going to walk a couple hundred yards around to the bridge that went out onto the peninsula and then backtrack to the tee if his ball was in the hazard. Probably 3 out of 4 times the I would stop in the rough. 

 

So everyone who played their routinely violated the “no provisionals for above in the hazard“ rule. Play the second ball and if the first one was in the rough, play it. 

Edited October 20, 2022 by North Butte