Lost Ball?

[antip]

8 minutes ago, DaveLeeNC said:

And without some guidance on what 'same area' means we are back to square one. 

 

dave

Not square one. The reply Dave has to date affirms in that one ball assumed situation (the OP), they are only searching for one ball not both. I don't think that answer is impacted by whether the estimated area of the two balls is the same - and we are seeking further clarification of that.

[Hawkeye77]

1 minute ago, antip said:

Not square one. The reply Dave has to date affirms in that one ball assumed situation (the OP), they are only searching for one ball not both. I don't think that answer is impacted by whether the estimated area of the two balls is the same - and we are seeking further clarification of that.

 

The answer wouldn't be impacted at all if the facts haven't changed - "estimated area the same" could be any expanse of territory, within 2 yards, within 20 yards, within 40 yards, really doesn't mean much unless you want to manufacture a search for OP's ball.

 

With a ball visible and assumed to be the OP, the search was for one ball and one ball only, that's been answered.  The fact his actual ball was not visible and somewhere "nearby" doesn't matter.

[DaveLeeNC]

10 minutes ago, antip said:

Not square one. The reply Dave has to date affirms in that one ball assumed situation (the OP), they are only searching for one ball not both. I don't think that answer is impacted by whether the estimated area of the two balls is the same - and we are seeking further clarification of that.

My comment is specific to the interaction between you and Mr. Bean. dave

[Mr. Bean]

26 minutes ago, DaveLeeNC said:

And without some guidance on what 'same area' means we are back to square one. 

 

dave

 

It is my suggestion that you once go out with a referee and ask him/her to show what a search area means. My view is that a search area is the area the ball may be lost within. I have absolutely no problem with that guidance and that is what I have used for my entire career as a referee and I know all the others around here have used exactly the same ctiteria.

 

Sure, you cannot say that the area is precisely 15x23 yds or similar but you estimate the area the ball is expected to be found. Similarly, you need to estimate when the player whose ball is to be searched arrives in that area so you may start the clock.

 

Once again, "you will know it when you see it". 

[Hawkeye77]

4 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

It is my suggestion that you once go out with a referee and ask him/her to show what a search area means. My view is that a search area is the area the ball may be lost within. I have absolutely no problem with that guidance and that is what I have used for my entire career as a referee and I know all the others around here have used exactly the same ctiteria.

 

Sure, you cannot say that the area is precisely 15x23 yds or similar but you estimate the area the ball is expected to be found. Similarly, you need to estimate when the player whose ball is to be searched arrives in that area so you may start the clock.

 

Once again, "you will know it when you see it". 

I don't think anyone could argue with that.

 

It's not what the original situation is about, but seems about as good an explanation of "search area" as there could be.  Caveat - no idea if "search area" is a term defined or used in the Rules, but assume either it is or there is some equivalent?

[Mr. Bean]

52 minutes ago, antip said:

Two balls unsighted and estimated to be in the same area? Then I agree, simultaneous search times are the order of the day.

 

Ok, we are making progress. Let us go to next level.

 

Fred and Mark both drive their balls left into the rough where balls trationally may get lost. After having played their provisionals they head towards the area they expect to find their balls. Now, three scenarios:

1. They arrive close to the area and immediately spot a ball visible within the area balls are expected to be found.

2. They arrive in the area and having arrived they spot a ball visible within that area.

3. They arrive in the area and having searched for the balls for 3 seconds they spot a ball visible within that area.

 

In all those scenarios they do not try to identify that visible ball but search for the other ball for 3 minutes with no success. After that 3 minutes they go and identify the visible ball as Mark's ball.

 

Question: In which of those scenarios Mark's ball is not lost?

[Mr. Bean]

10 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

I don't think anyone could argue with that.

 

It's not what the original situation is about, but seems about as good an explanation of "search area" as there could be.  Caveat - no idea if "search area" is a term defined or used in the Rules, but assume either it is or there is some equivalent?

 

From the top of my head and after a quick glance at relevant Rules I cannot find any such term. However, a search area (or "the area where the ball is expected to be found") used to exist in old Decisions and maybe exists in current Clarifications as well as it is a very important concept. Without defining where the area is it would be impossible to time the search.

 

I will check if I find something from the Clarifications.

 

EDIT: First thing I found is in 18.3c(2) but it only mentions "estimated to be", so it does not use any term reflecting an area. Also Clarification 18.3c(2)/1 uses "the spot the player reasonably thinks or assumes the ball to be". Do read the entire Clarification and pay attention to the 2nd bullet of it.

 

 

Edited March 25, 2023 by Mr. Bean

[DaveLeeNC]

13 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

It is my suggestion that you once go out with a referee and ask him/her to show what a search area means. My view is that a search area is the area the ball may be lost within. I have absolutely no problem with that guidance and that is what I have used for my entire career as a referee and I know all the others around here have used exactly the same ctiteria.

 

The judgement from a referee is outstanding 'guidance'. But for the case posted we did not have such a thing. 

 

dave

[Mr. Bean]

4 minutes ago, DaveLeeNC said:

 

The judgement from a referee is outstanding 'guidance'. But for the case posted we did not have such a thing. 

 

dave

 

No, but following my advice could give you a far better insight on the entire concept than reading words.

[davep043]

4 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

What exactly did you ask and what was the answer?

Here was the way I phrased the question, as close as reasonably possible to the OP:

Quote

In match Play, Player A is typically a little longer off the tee, 10 to 30 yards.   Both players drive on the left edge of the fairway, over a rise and not visible from the tee. As A and B crest the rise they see one ball in the first cut, and no other ball visible. They both assume that the visible ball belongs to A and begin looking for B's ball in the rough short of visible ball. After three minutes they do not find B's ball. B is about to head back to the tee when A walks up to the visible ball... and realize it is is actually B's ball. I almost immediately A see another ball a few yards further forward in the thick rough, which he identifies as his.

Clearly B's ball is lost after 3 minutes of searching.  Could Lost/2 apply in this case, so that the search time would apply to both balls, and both are Lost when not found and identified within 3 minutes?  Or since A doesn't believe he was searching for his ball, his search time hasn't begun yet?  Considering the probably proximity of the two shots, did either player have a responsibility to promptly identify the visible ball?  Are there other Rules to consider?   I anticipate there's not enough information for a definitive answer, I just am interested to understand which rules could or should apply.

The USGA asks that their answer not be published, but I'll summarize it.  B's ball is lost after 3 minutes of search.  He had the chance to go identify that visible ball, and didn't.  Lost/2 doesn't apply to Player A, as it is meant for one player who has 2 balls in the same, and A has only one ball in that area.  A's time starts when he begins to search for hos own ball.

 

I asked for further clarification, can Lost/2 ever apply to two players, each with a ball in the very close proximity?  Since A "claims" the visible ball, does he have a responsibility to promptly identify it?  I'm wondering if I'll get a response I might have to submit it as a fresh question.

[Hawkeye77]

1 minute ago, davep043 said:

Here was the way I phrased the question, as close as reasonably possible to the OP:

The USGA asks that their answer not be published, but I'll summarize it.  B's ball is lost after 3 minutes of search.  He had the chance to go identify that visible ball, and didn't.  Lost/2 doesn't apply to Player A, as it is meant for one player who has 2 balls in the same, and A has only one ball in that area.  A's time starts when he begins to search for hos own ball.

 

I asked for further clarification, can Lost/2 ever apply to two players, each with a ball in the very close proximity?  Since A "claims" the visible ball, does he have a responsibility to promptly identify it?  I'm wondering if I'll get a response I might have to submit it as a fresh question.

 

The "found" vs. "identify" was something I thought was interesting (the entire civilized world's MMV, lol).  My thinking is, in the context of my ball, which is what matters, if I see a ball in the fairway I think is mine I don't have any obligation to purposefully identify it, even though in many situations and after the fact it would have proven to be a good idea (i.e., mistakenly hitting the wrong ball, where if I don't identify it, I've assumed the risk of not doing so).  

[Mr. Bean]

8 minutes ago, davep043 said:

Here was the way I phrased the question, as close as reasonably possible to the OP:

The USGA asks that their answer not be published, but I'll summarize it.  B's ball is lost after 3 minutes of search.  He had the chance to go identify that visible ball, and didn't.  Lost/2 doesn't apply to Player A, as it is meant for one player who has 2 balls in the same, and A has only one ball in that area.  A's time starts when he begins to search for his own ball.

 

 

So USGA assumes both balls are not lost in essentially same area. Fair enough.

[Hawkeye77]

28 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

Ok, we are making progress. Let us go to next level.

 

Fred and Mark both drive their balls left into the rough where balls trationally may get lost. After having played their provisionals they head towards the area they expect to find their balls. Now, three scenarios:

1. They arrive close to the area and immediately spot a ball visible within the area balls are expected to be found.

2. They arrive in the area and having arrived they spot a ball visible within that area.

3. They arrive in the area and having searched for the balls for 3 seconds they spot a ball visible within that area.

 

In all those scenarios they do not try to identify that visible ball but search for the other ball for 3 minutes with no success. After that 3 minutes they go and identify the visible ball as Mark's ball.

 

Question: In which of those scenarios Mark's ball is not lost?

1 and 2 really aren't distinguishable - "close to" vs. "in" is too vague to use as a standard.  If the players in either 1 or 2 are purposefully engaged in a search for Mark's ball, and have assumed the visible ball to be Fred's, after the 3 minute search being unsuccessful, Mark's ball is lost.  That question has been answered.  You don't supply enough facts for there to be a definite answer to 1 or 2, so the ferreting out of additional and relevant info is left to the rules official and who knows what it may be.

Edited March 25, 2023 by Hawkeye77

[Mr. Bean]

4 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

The "found" vs. "identify" was something I thought was interesting (the entire civilized world's MMV, lol).  My thinking is, in the context of my ball, which is what matters, if I see a ball in the fairway I think is mine I don't have any obligation to purposefully identify it, even though in many situations and after the fact it would have proven to be a good idea (i.e., mistakenly hitting the wrong ball, where if I don't identify it, I've assumed the risk of not doing so).  

 

The key is that you are not searching for your ball at the time. That is the entire point of this whole discussion.

[Hawkeye77]

9 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

The key is that you are not searching for your ball at the time. That is the entire point of this whole discussion.

 

Obvious, yes.

Edited March 25, 2023 by Hawkeye77

[DaveLeeNC]

17 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

No, but following my advice could give you a far better insight on the entire concept than reading words.

It would be interesting to know if the active posters in this thread were all present at this event, would we have agreed on this 'same area' issue. 

 

dave

[Mr. Bean]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye77 said:

1 and 2 really aren't distinguishable - "close to" vs. "in" is too vague to use as a standard.  If the players in either 1 or 2 are purposefully engaged in a search for Mark's ball, and have assumed the visible ball to be Fred's, after the 3 minute search being unsuccessful, Mark's ball is lost.  That question has been answered.  You don't supply enough facts for there to be a definite answer to 1 or 2, so the ferreting out of additional and relevant info is left to the rules official and who knows what it may be.

 

My question was directed to @antip but I'll comment.

 

Pay attention to what is the difference being in the area or being close to the area. The search only commences when you are IN the area. When you are approaching the area you are not yet searching for any ball and the search time has not yet started. That may be a very relevant factor and I want to hear what antip has to say about it.

[Hawkeye77]

1 minute ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

My question was directed to @antip but I'll comment.

 

Pay attention to what is the difference being in the area or being close to the area. The search only commences when you are IN the area. When you are approaching the area you are not yet searching for any ball and the search time has not yet started. That may be a very relevant factor and I want to hear what antip has to say about it.

I did and in the context of the hypothetical I think it is a distinction without a difference - you say they commenced a search as a matter of fact, which means that's what they did, you can't deem them not to be searching because they are "close to" if were actively engaged in a search.

[Hawkeye77]

7 minutes ago, DaveLeeNC said:

It would be interesting to know if the active posters in this thread were all present at this event, would we have agreed on this 'same area' issue. 

 

dave

 

It was completely irrelevant.

[Mr. Bean]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye77 said:

I did and in the context of the hypothetical I think it is a distinction without a difference - you say they commenced a search as a matter of fact, which means that's what they did, you can't deem them not to be searching because they are "close to" if were actively engaged in a search.

 

So... how can they be searching if search time has not started yet..? And if they are searching shouldn't they start the clock even though they are not in the area where the balls are assumed to be..?

[Hawkeye77]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

So... how can they be searching if search time has not started yet..? And if they are searching shouldn't they start the clock even though they are not in the area where the balls are assumed to be..?

Bean, your hypothetical said they searched for three minutes so yes, they searched and yes the clock started, no idea what you are on about now. They can't "unsearch".

 

LOL, no, you don't get to "search" for "3 minutes" (this is what you say they did) and then say "oops, we aren't in the 'area' we'll move over here" and start again.  You know better than that.

Edited March 25, 2023 by Hawkeye77

[Mr. Bean]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye77 said:

Bean, your hypothetical said they searched for three minutes so yes, they searched and yes the clock started, no idea what you are on about now. They can't "unsearch".

 

LOL, no, you don't get to "search" for "3 minutes" (this is what you say they did) and then say "oops, we aren't in the 'area'" we'll move over here and start again.  You know better than that.

 

Now you are confusing yourself...

 

You wrote

 

"1 and 2 really aren't distinguishable - "close to" vs. "in" is too vague to use as a standard.  If the players in either 1 or 2 are purposefully engaged in a search for Mark's ball,"

 

In 1 they have not yet arrived IN the area but in 2 they are IN the area. So I ask again: how can they have started their search if they have not yet arrived IN the area where search time is started?

[Hawkeye77]

1 minute ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

Now you are confusing yourself...

 

You wrote

 

"1 and 2 really aren't distinguishable - "close to" vs. "in" is too vague to use as a standard.  If the players in either 1 or 2 are purposefully engaged in a search for Mark's ball,"

 

In 1 they have not yet arrived IN the area but in 2 they are IN the area. So I ask again: how can they have started their search if they have not yet arrived IN the area where search time is started?

Good God man, because you said they searched for three minutes - those are the facts you posited.

 

I'm not confused, lol.

 

If they were engaged in a search as you say, that's it.  They don't get a get out of jail free card because they or someone else wants to claim they were "close" not "in".  

 

 

[davep043]

21 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

So USGA assumes both balls are not lost in essentially same area. Fair enough.

My other thought is that the integrity of the player is always accepted.  If A says he is searching for B's ball, that's what he's doing.  As I mentioned in another post, A's integrity would be put to the test if he moves his own ball while searching only for the other ball.  7.4 makes it clear that if the Player moves his ball before beginning his search for it, he is penalized. 

[DaveLeeNC]

16 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

It was completely irrelevant.

It is not irrelevant to the proposition that 'in the area vs out of the area' is clear if you are there. 

 

dave

[Schulzmc]

11 minutes ago, davep043 said:

My other thought is that the integrity of the player is always accepted.  If A says he is searching for B's ball, that's what he's doing.  As I mentioned in another post, A's integrity would be put to the test if he moves his own ball while searching only for the other ball.  7.4 makes it clear that if the Player moves his ball before beginning his search for it, he is penalized. 

Obviously in hind sight it is hard to know for sure. But I am fairly certain if I had kicked a ball while searching for my opponent’s ball, and then realized it was indeed my ball and not his, I would have taken a penalty for moving my ball. I was not searching for it, so the 7.4 exception would not have applied.

[Schulzmc]

In the discussion of where the search area is, does the fact that there was a visible ball help? In the first case the search area was short of that ball. Once we knew that was his ball I immediately started looking past that ball. So - search area one is in the rough in the 30 yards or so leading up to that ball, and search area two is the area in the rough after that ball. 

[Hawkeye77]

Just now, Schulzmc said:

In the discussion of where the search area is, does the fact that there was a visible ball help? In the first case the search area was short of that ball. Once we knew that was his ball I immediately started looking past that ball. So - search area one is in the rough in the 30 yards or so leading up to that ball, and search area two is the area in the rough after that ball. 

 

It doesn't matter where the "search area" was or whether there were two "search areas" in your case. 

 

 

[davep043]

1 minute ago, Schulzmc said:

Obviously in hind sight it is hard to know for sure. But I am fairly certain if I had kicked a ball while searching for my opponent’s ball, and then realized it was indeed my ball and not his, I would have taken a penalty for moving my ball. I was not searching for it, so the 7.4 exception would not have applied.

And to be clear, I didn't intend to accuse you.  I think we all know players who will present a story that puts them in the best possible situation, others who will be truthful.  And in this situation, some will remember that a ball accidentally moved during a search isn't penalized, without understanding that the Exception only applies to the ball they are actively searching for.

1 minute ago, Schulzmc said:

In the discussion of where the search area is, does the fact that there was a visible ball help? In the first case the search area was short of that ball. Once we knew that was his ball I immediately started looking past that ball. So - search area one is in the rough in the 30 yards or so leading up to that ball, and search area two is the area in the rough after that ball. 

In hindsight, since you didn't know which ball it was, the search area really should have started 30 yards short of the visible ball, and extended 30 yards past it.  That's a huge territory, but it takes into account everything you knew, and disregards your assumption about the visible ball.  I think the moral of the story is that its best to identify any visible ball within a reasonable distance first, and refine the search area second.  

[Schulzmc]

3 minutes ago, davep043 said:

I think the moral of the story is that it’s best to identify any visible ball within a reasonable distance first, and refine the search area second.  

Yes - I totally agree if we had just checked that ball in the first cut then none of this would have happened. But we also would have missed an interesting thread here! 

 

The thing I love about this forum is I almost always learn something! In this case I learned intent does indeed matter (I think I had assumed that but now I know). 

 

I also learned about the rules regarding a concurrent search. It often happens at our course that two balls are lost in the same general area. We do indeed consider the three minutes to apply to both searches at the same time. But if someone had suggested to me “I’m not going to look for my ball until the 3 minutes for your ball seach is over” I would not have known how to respond. Now I do.