Tapping down a ball mark off the green????

[denkea]

I know that if my ball comes to rest just off the green behind an existing ball mark, also off the green,  I can't tap down the mark.

 

But what if another player walks over and taps down the ball mark?  Does anyone get a penalty?  

Edited October 16, 2023 by denkea

[sui generis]

35 minutes ago, denkea said:

But what if another player walks over and taps down the ball mark?  Does anyone get a penalty?

 

Best to read 8.3 for yourself. 🙂

 

https://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-clarifications/rules-and-clarifications.html#!ruletype=fr&section=rule&rulenum=8&subrulenum=3

[nsxguy]

1 hour ago, sui generis said:

 

Best to read 8.3 for yourself. 🙂

 

https://www.usga.org/rules/rules-and-clarifications/rules-and-clarifications.html#!ruletype=fr&section=rule&rulenum=8&subrulenum=3

 

Ah Haaaaa, so "intent" comes into play again.

 

Hey SG, you might remember the older rules on this one.

 

Just curious. About 6 or 7 years ago I had about a 9 iron to the green. In front of me, maybe a foot or 3, was a pitch/ball mark, apparently from some previous shot.

 

Before hitting my shot, I take a stride ahead and tap the ball mark down with my club moving the edges together.

 

My buddy, a caddy at the time, and much more conversant with the rules than I, told me, after I hit the shot, "Not for nothin', but it's a penalty to fix that ball mark".

 

Any chance he was correct back then - or now ?

 

 

[sui generis]

7 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

Before hitting my shot, I take a stride ahead and tap the ball mark down with my club moving the edges together.

 

Today, the gentle referee will ask you why you fixed the ball mark.

[nsxguy]

16 minutes ago, sui generis said:

 

Today, the gentle referee will ask you why you fixed the ball mark.

 

 

Yeah, I got that from reading the reference you gave.

 

I was wondering about "back then". 👍

Edited October 16, 2023 by nsxguy

[sui generis]

3 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

I was wondering about "back then".

 For me, keeping up with today's Rules means jettisoning yesterday's Rules. Though I still have the books, they're deep in the attic on purpose. Some of these guys on here who are much smarter than I are sure to know. 😉

[golfday]

I'm a little confused on this one. 8.2 says:

Exception – Actions to Care for the Course: There is no penalty under this Rule if the player alters any such other physical conditions to care for the course (such as smoothing footprints in a bunker or replacing a divot in a divot hole).

 

Fixing the ball mark is definitely caring for the course, there can't be any argument that fixing a ball mark is not an aspect of good course maintenance. Also 8.2 specifically says replacing a divot is ok... but 8.1 says that you cannot:

(3) Alter the surface of the ground, including by:

• Replacing divots in a divot hole,

• Removing or pressing down divots that have already been replaced or other cut turf that is already in place

Wouldn't replacing the divot hole fall under caring for the course? In this scenario I'm thinking there's a divot right or ball mark in front of my ball - so I'm not changing any ground that my swing will touch or touching my ball - and if it's a ball mark I fix it / tap it down, and if it's an unfilled divot I either fill it with sand or with the actual divot (presuming it's near by and can be saved). If I take those actions am I ok bc under 8.2 what I've done is care for the course, or bc in 8.1 I've replaced a divot?

 

[danthegolfer]

In my opinion, this would be about intent.  If the player does it for general course care then should be fine. If they do it because they are helping you, then that would be a problem.

Unless it's match play, in which case, your opponent may do what they like.

[jholz]

I do find the idea of "shi**ily" improving a fellow players' line rather amusing.

 

I wonder how many times it would take for someone to be aware of the rule and call a penalty?

 

For fists to be thrown???

[rogolf]

3 hours ago, golfday said:

I'm a little confused on this one. 8.2 says:

Exception – Actions to Care for the Course: There is no penalty under this Rule if the player alters any such other physical conditions to care for the course (such as smoothing footprints in a bunker or replacing a divot in a divot hole).

 

Fixing the ball mark is definitely caring for the course, there can't be any argument that fixing a ball mark is not an aspect of good course maintenance. Also 8.2 specifically says replacing a divot is ok... but 8.1 says that you cannot:

(3) Alter the surface of the ground, including by:

• Replacing divots in a divot hole,

• Removing or pressing down divots that have already been replaced or other cut turf that is already in place

Wouldn't replacing the divot hole fall under caring for the course? In this scenario I'm thinking there's a divot right or ball mark in front of my ball - so I'm not changing any ground that my swing will touch or touching my ball - and if it's a ball mark I fix it / tap it down, and if it's an unfilled divot I either fill it with sand or with the actual divot (presuming it's near by and can be saved). If I take those actions am I ok bc under 8.2 what I've done is care for the course, or bc in 8.1 I've replaced a divot?

 

You also have to look at Clarification 8.2b/1, which says (n part).

Rule 8.2 applies only to altering physical conditions other than the conditions affecting the stroke when the player's ball is at rest on the course or when they do not have a ball in play.

This is also applicable:

All players are expected to play in the spirit of the game by:

• Acting with integrity – for example, by following the Rules, applying all penalties, and being honest in all aspects of play.

 

The careful player would do those things (repair divot hole, fix ball marks that are on their line of play) after they have made their stroke, thereby avoiding the appearance of evil.

Edited October 16, 2023 by rogolf

[denkea]

"Intent"  the opposite of which is "unintentional" or "Accidental".

 

I would be hard pressed to say someone accidentally tapped down a ball mark.  

 

So if someone did tap down a ball mark it would surely be intentional.  

 

The question still remains.  Did the player tapping down the ball mark improve anothers line of play?  Most assuredly he did.  

 

Penalty?????

[sui generis]

1 hour ago, denkea said:

Did the player tapping down the ball mark improve anothers line of play?

 

The referee might start by asking if the repairing player's "intent" was to care for the course or was it to improve the other player's line of play.

[nsxguy]

5 hours ago, denkea said:

"Intent"  the opposite of which is "unintentional" or "Accidental".

 

I would be hard pressed to say someone accidentally tapped down a ball mark.  

 

So if someone did tap down a ball mark it would surely be intentional.  

 

The question still remains.  Did the player tapping down the ball mark improve anothers line of play?  Most assuredly he did.  

 

Penalty?????

 

The intent is not for "did he intend to fix it ?", but for "Why did he fix it ?"

 

As in did the player fix it to affect the "conditions affecting the stroke"

 

or

 

did he do it to care for the course ?

 

 

Edited October 17, 2023 by nsxguy

[rogolf]

2 hours ago, denkea said:

"Intent"  the opposite of which is "unintentional" or "Accidental".

 

I would be hard pressed to say someone accidentally tapped down a ball mark.  

 

So if someone did tap down a ball mark it would surely be intentional.  

 

The question still remains.  Did the player tapping down the ball mark improve anothers line of play?  Most assuredly he did.  

 

Penalty?????

The actions of another player are covered in Rule 1.3c.

A penalty also applies when:

- another person takes an action that would breach the Rules if taken by the player or caddie and that person does so at the player's request or while acting with the player's authority, or

- the player sees another person about to take and action concerning the player's ball or equipment that they know would breach the Rules if taken by the player or caddie and does not take reasonable steps to stop it from happening.

[antip]

On 10/17/2023 at 9:45 AM, nsxguy said:

 

The intent is not for "did he intend to fix it ?", but for "Why did he fix it ?"

 

As in did the player fix it to affect the "conditions affecting the stroke"

 

or

 

did he do it to care for the course ?

 

 

Doesn't have to be either/or, can be both simultaneously. If only 1, then penalty. If only 2 or both 1 AND 2, there is no penalty. 

[nsxguy]

On 10/16/2023 at 6:45 PM, nsxguy said:

 

The intent is not for "did he intend to fix it ?", but for "Why did he fix it ?"

 

As in did the player fix it to affect the "conditions affecting the stroke"

 

or

 

did he do it to care for the course ?

 

 

 

2 hours ago, antip said:

Doesn't have to be either/or, can be both simultaneously. If only 1, then penalty. If only 2 or both 1 AND 2, there is no penalty. 

 

That's an interesting pov.

 

Personally, I would think if #1 was even a "part" of the reason, then yes, penalty.

 

i.e. If "both", then he did it for #1, and, if #1 was A reason, then I would think "yes, penalty".

[davep043]

 

On 10/16/2023 at 11:11 AM, nsxguy said:

Before hitting my shot, I take a stride ahead and tap the ball mark down with my club moving the edges together.

 

On 10/16/2023 at 11:21 AM, sui generis said:

 

Today, the gentle referee will ask you why you fixed the ball mark.

If I'm reading this right, @nsxguy would have been improving the CATS for his own stroke, violating 8.1, and there's no exception in 8.1 for "care for the course".  That exception only applies to 8.2 and 8.3.  

 

On 10/16/2023 at 1:24 PM, golfday said:

I'm a little confused on this one. 8.2 says:

Exception – Actions to Care for the Course: There is no penalty under this Rule if the player alters any such other physical conditions to care for the course (such as smoothing footprints in a bunker or replacing a divot in a divot hole).

 

Fixing the ball mark is definitely caring for the course, there can't be any argument that fixing a ball mark is not an aspect of good course maintenance. Also 8.2 specifically says replacing a divot is ok... but 8.1 says that you cannot:

(3) Alter the surface of the ground, including by:

• Replacing divots in a divot hole,

• Removing or pressing down divots that have already been replaced or other cut turf that is already in place

Wouldn't replacing the divot hole fall under caring for the course? In this scenario I'm thinking there's a divot right or ball mark in front of my ball - so I'm not changing any ground that my swing will touch or touching my ball - and if it's a ball mark I fix it / tap it down, and if it's an unfilled divot I either fill it with sand or with the actual divot (presuming it's near by and can be saved). If I take those actions am I ok bc under 8.2 what I've done is care for the course, or bc in 8.1 I've replaced a divot?

 

If you've improved the Conditions Affecting your OWN Stroke, 8.1 applies, and there's no Exception in 8.1 for "care for the course".  If you're planning to hit a shot in the air, maybe you didn't improve the CATS, but if you were considering a low shot or a putt, you almost certainly did improve the CATS.  8.2 applies when you improve other factors that are not specifically Conditions Affecting Your Stroke, such as an area where your ball might go or come to rest after a stroke, or where it might go if it moves (natural forces) before a stroke is made.  8.3 applies to improving the CATS for another player.  Both 8.2 and 8.3 have that exception for care for the course.

 

[nsxguy]

3 hours ago, davep043 said:

 

 

If I'm reading this right, @nsxguy would have been improving the CATS for his own stroke, violating 8.1, and there's no exception in 8.1 for "care for the course".  That exception only applies to 8.2 and 8.3.  

 

If you've improved the Conditions Affecting your OWN Stroke, 8.1 applies, and there's no Exception in 8.1 for "care for the course".  If you're planning to hit a shot in the air, maybe you didn't improve the CATS, but if you were considering a low shot or a putt, you almost certainly did improve the CATS.  8.2 applies when you improve other factors that are not specifically Conditions Affecting Your Stroke, such as an area where your ball might go or come to rest after a stroke, or where it might go if it moves (natural forces) before a stroke is made.  8.3 applies to improving the CATS for another player.  Both 8.2 and 8.3 have that exception for care for the course.

 

 

"Line of play" Given my description, the only cats I could have affected by fixing the ball mark would've been the "line of play".

 

Line of play - "The line where the player intends their ball to go after a stroke, including the area on that line that is a reasonable distance up above the ground and on either side of that line.

 

The line of play is not necessarily a straight line between two points (for example, it may be a curved line based on where the player intends the ball to go)".

 

Above you said (to golfday) "If you're planning to hit a shot in the air, maybe you didn't improve the CATS".

 

Maybe ? How does one make that determination ?

 

Since the definition (LOP) includes a "reasonable distance up above the ground", I would think that refers to something like a low-hanging branch, yes ?

 

So, if "golfday" is planning a shot that would never(?) be "expected" to go along the ground ("planning to hit a shot in the air"), how is that any different from me hitting a 9 iron ~130 yards to the green ?

 

 

[antip]

8 hours ago, nsxguy said:

 

 

That's an interesting pov.

 

Personally, I would think if #1 was even a "part" of the reason, then yes, penalty.

 

i.e. If "both", then he did it for #1, and, if #1 was A reason, then I would think "yes, penalty".

It's not my POV, it is USGA ruling. But we need to be clear what we are talking about - I was commenting on the scenario above of another player repairing that plug with intent to both improve CATS of someone else AND to care for the course. This is the 8.3 Exception scenario. No penalty. 

Dave correctly points out this doesn't apply if it is the actual player whose ball is affected that improves the CATS, there is no caring for the course exception in that case. 

[davep043]

13 hours ago, nsxguy said:

 

"Line of play" Given my description, the only cats I could have affected by fixing the ball mark would've been the "line of play".

 

Line of play - "The line where the player intends their ball to go after a stroke, including the area on that line that is a reasonable distance up above the ground and on either side of that line.

 

The line of play is not necessarily a straight line between two points (for example, it may be a curved line based on where the player intends the ball to go)".

 

Above you said (to golfday) "If you're planning to hit a shot in the air, maybe you didn't improve the CATS".

 

Maybe ? How does one make that determination ?

 

Since the definition (LOP) includes a "reasonable distance up above the ground", I would think that refers to something like a low-hanging branch, yes ?

 

So, if "golfday" is planning a shot that would never(?) be "expected" to go along the ground ("planning to hit a shot in the air"), how is that any different from me hitting a 9 iron ~130 yards to the green ?

 

 

My apology, I misread what you wrote.  I had in my mind that you had hit a 9-iron, after which your ball had an old pitch mark in front of it.  

However, you ask "how do I make that determination?"  Beginning in 2019, the term "Improve" is defined, it means that you have created a potential advantage.  Before then, your caddie friend was right, taking any of the listed actions along the line of play was a no-no.  Now the action must also create a potential advantage for it to become a no-no.  8.1a and 8.1b along with their Clarifications help you to make the determination.