OB Situation

[chunkYEAGER]

Playing partner’s ball came to rest inches from a chain link fence.  The fence posts were painted white marking OB as it was the edge of the property.  He claimed he got relief. I claimed I have no idea.  Thoughts?  Thanks for any and all insights.

[Colin L]

You do not get free relief from a "boundary object" such as the fence posts. He could, however,

take penalty relief  under the unplayable ball rule [Rule 19].

[rogolf]

10 minutes ago, Colin L said:

You do not get free relief from a "boundary object" such as the fence posts. He could, however,

take penalty relief  under the unplayable ball rule [Rule 19].

Just adding to Colin's response - there is no free relief from the fencing either.

[Imp]

And if there's a cartpath right next to that fence where your one club unplayable would leave you on, you get free relief from the cart path to the other side of the path.

Edited February 26 by Imp

[Mr. Bean]

26 minutes ago, Imp said:

And if there's a cartpath right next to that fence where your one club unplayable would leave you on, you get free relief from the cart path to the other side of the path.

 

And if you are standing on that cart path in the first place you get free relief from that cart path with no penalty whatsoever.

 

Shall we take this further from the original question by spicing it up with things that were not involved..?

[ShortGolfer]

That situation came up yesterday at the PGA event in Mexico.  The ball was too close to the fence to take a swing so the 2nd place finisher took a penalty drop on the last hole, costing him a stroke.

He also had to drop again from the proper height.  The broadcast did a good job of explaining the rules.

Edited February 26 by ShortGolfer

[GoGoErky]

2 hours ago, chunkYEAGER said:

Playing partner’s ball came to rest inches from a chain link fence.  The fence posts were painted white marking OB as it was the edge of the property.  He claimed he got relief. I claimed I have no idea.  Thoughts?  Thanks for any and all insights.

Always refer to the rulebook. When he says he does make him show you where or if you don’t know look it up. USGA has an app that can be used

[BirdieBob]

1 hour ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

And if you are standing on that cart path in the first place you get free relief from that cart path with no penalty whatsoever.

 

Shall we take this further from the original question by spicing it up with things that were not involved..?

 

You mean like if the ball was lying in casual water or a burrowing animal hole.... would he then also get a free drop?

Edited February 26 by BirdieBob

[Newby]

Valimaki, Mexico

 

https://golf.com/news/tour-runner-up-makes-wild-72nd-hole-par/

Edited February 26 by Newby

[596]

1 hour ago, BirdieBob said:

 

You mean like if the ball was lying in casual water or a burrowing animal hole.... would he then also get a free drop?

What if the animal hole is in casual water up against the border fence near a dirt cart path that has a maintenance cart tire track mark in it? 

[Pepperturbo]

2 hours ago, ShortGolfer said:

That situation came up yesterday at the PGA event in Mexico.  The ball was too close to the fence to take a swing so the 2nd place finisher took a penalty drop on the last hole, costing him a stroke.

He also had to drop again from the proper height.  The broadcast did a good job of explaining the rules.

I was aware that... amazing how Valimaki was smart enough to first ask about scoring spread, then watch him after penalty stroke end up in the grass on the fairway side of the cart path.

[Mr. Bean]

2 minutes ago, Pepperturbo said:

I was aware that... amazing how Valimaki was smart enough to first ask about scoring spread, then watch him after penalty stroke end up in the grass on the fairway side of the cart path.

 

That is not suprising at all. Here in Finland we take care of the players and educate them with the Rules. Especially the 1st Finnish PGA Tour player ever. He had to take a 2-week rules session before leaving the country. 😁

Edited February 26 by Mr. Bean

[dnong]

Valimaki should not have been allowed to drop on the grass left of the cart path. The closer relief would be on the waste area toward the fence.

[Pepperturbo]

15 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

That is not suprising at all. Here in Finland we take care of the players and educate them with the Rules. Especially the 1st Finnish PGA Tour player ever. He had to take a 2-week rules session before leaving the country. 😁

His style of play was impressive.

[sui generis]

11 minutes ago, dnong said:

Valimaki should not have been allowed to drop on the grass left of the cart path. The closer relief would be on the waste area toward the fence.

 

You were there? Why didn't you interrupt the PGA Tour Rules Official who helped the player? Or, do you think your La-Z-Boy and TV has a better perspective?

[Mr. Bean]

16 minutes ago, dnong said:

Valimaki should not have been allowed to drop on the grass left of the cart path. The closer relief would be on the waste area toward the fence.

 

Go tell it to PGA Tour. They must have got it all wrong.

[Newby]

19 minutes ago, dnong said:

Valimaki should not have been allowed to drop on the grass left of the cart path. The closer relief would be on the waste area toward the fence.

He did drop in the 'waste area' but it was incorporated with a path. He dropped on the IO with a 1 stroke unplayable penalty and then got free relief on the grass. He dropped improperly and so dropped again. 

[chunkYEAGER]

6 hours ago, Colin L said:

You do not get free relief from a "boundary object" such as the fence posts. He could, however,

take penalty relief  under the unplayable ball rule [Rule 19].

Thanks Colin! Reminds me of the road hole at St. Andrews and all the highlights of players hitting into the wall.  Thanks again!

[nsxguy]

3 hours ago, Newby said:

He did drop in the 'waste area' but it was incorporated with a path. He dropped on the IO with a 1 stroke unplayable penalty and then got free relief on the grass. He dropped improperly and so dropped again. 

 

This was the part that puzzled me.

 

He measured his 2 CLs from the fence and dropped in the waste area. I believe at the full 2 CLs it brought his feet onto the paved cart path. But even if it did, he could have dropped a little bit closer to the OB fence and he'd have had a clean stance & swing.

 

But then the PGA official told him the paved path and the waste area were all considered (part of ?) the "cart path area", so then he was allowed to drop on the fairway side of the paved path.

 

So I guess my confusion comes from,,,,,,,,,, if that entire area  (paved cart path + waste area) was considered "all part of the cart path area", why wouldn't he have simply gotten free relief to the other side of the paved path from the fence where the ball was in the 1st place ?

 

(Consider the grass area below between the fence and the cart path as the "waste area" at the tournament)

 

[rogolf]

1 hour ago, nsxguy said:

 

This was the part that puzzled me.

 

He measured his 2 CLs from the fence and dropped in the waste area. I believe at the full 2 CLs it brought his feet onto the paved cart path. But even if it did, he could have dropped a little bit closer to the OB fence and he'd have had a clean stance & swing.

 

But then the PGA official told him the paved path and the waste area were all considered (part of ?) the "cart path area", so then he was allowed to drop on the fairway side of the paved path.

 

So I guess my confusion comes from,,,,,,,,,, if that entire area  (paved cart path + waste area) was considered "all part of the cart path area", why wouldn't he have simply gotten free relief to the other side of the paved path from the fence where the ball was in the 1st place ?

 

(Consider the grass area below between the fence and the cart path as the "waste area" at the tournament)

 

Rule 16 (Relief from Abnormal Course Conditions, including Immovable Obstructions) has a subsection titled "No Relief When Clearly Unreasonable".  This means that if a stroke is clearly unreasonable because of something from which the player is not allowed to take relief (such as a boundary object/fence), there is no free relief under that Rule.

Valimaki's ball came to rest against the out of bounds fencing and it was clearly unreasonable to make a stroke.  Hence he took unplayable and dropped onto the waste area which had been designated by the Committee as part of the cart path.  Once he dropped onto that area (cart path), he was entitled to free relief in the general area.

Edited February 27 by rogolf

[rogolf]

And a further report on this...

https://www.nbcsports.com/golf/news/tale-of-two-drops-why-sami-valimaki-didnt-get-a-free-drop-like-s-h-kim-did

[Augster]

I get the “clearly unreasonable” part, but Valmaki only didn’t get relief because nobody believed he could hop the fence and play sideways? Or he wasn’t smart enough to tell the RO that that’s what he was going to do?

 

Weak ruling in the final group after seeing the drop Kim got. 

Edited February 28 by Augster

[sui generis]

38 minutes ago, Augster said:

Weak ruling in the final group after seeing the drop Kim got. 

 

This experienced referee disagrees with you. 😉

[davep043]

On 2/27/2024 at 7:16 PM, Augster said:

I get the “clearly unreasonable” part, but Valmaki only didn’t get relief because nobody believed he could hop the fence and play sideways? Or he wasn’t smart enough to tell the RO that that’s what he was going to do?

 

Weak ruling in the final group after seeing the drop Kim got. 

From what I read, Valmaki didn't really ask for relief based on that kind of stroke.  He seems to indicate that it was too risky considering his position on the leader board, so he took the Unplayable penalty as the safer route.

[ShortGolfer]

Valmaki had a penalty stroke to give and still stay in 2nd.

There is also the mental aspect of taking penalties and moving on with the game.

[Mr. Bean]

1 hour ago, ShortGolfer said:

Valmaki had a penalty stroke to give and still stay in 2nd.

There is also the mental aspect of taking penalties and moving on with the game.

 

Lesson to learn here is how to calculate the percentages of success. Meaning, should I take a high risk of hitting my ball where it lies or take a penalty and guarantee a good/decent lie towards the green/target.

 

Pro golfers tend to have that mental aspect (exc. van de Velde...) but club golfers most often do not. Thus there is something for us recreational golfers to learn, thanks to Sami Välimäki.

[jlbos83]

The picture I saw had the ball wedged under the fence.  There was no realistic chance of playing it.  So unplayable was his only option.  That left him with a drop on the area that was defined as part of the path, an immovable obstruction.  Once he made that drop, he got free relief from that condition, which had to be on the course, so he got to go to the other side of the path.  His intelligence was shown in asking the score and realizing that first place was already lost, but second was secure if he took the one stroke unplayable penalty, but highly at risk if he tried to get out from under the fence with a stroke.  The situation brought a lot of rules into play, and he and the official seem to have worked through them exactly correctly.

 

[nsxguy]

7 hours ago, ShortGolfer said:

Valmaki had a penalty stroke to give and still stay in 2nd.

There is also the mental aspect of taking penalties and moving on with the game.

 

25 minutes ago, jlbos83 said:

but second was secure if he took the one stroke unplayable penalty, but highly at risk if he tried to get out from under the fence with a stroke.

 

He was 3 ahead of the 3rd place finisher. He'd have had to do something really foolish to not finish 2nd,,,,,,,,,,,,, which could have happened if he tried to hit it from under that fence.

[nsxguy]

5 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

Pro golfers tend to have that mental aspect (exc. van de Velde...) but club golfers most often do not. Thus there is something for us recreational golfers to learn, thanks to Sami Välimäki.

 

While there's certainly something to be learned about risk/reward, common sense, and not taking unnecessary chances,,,,,, pro golfers also have many different ways of knowing where they stand.

 

Club and recreational golfers often do not, unless they're only playing one or more players from within their own group.

[Augster]

The point is, he would never actually HAVE to hit the ball from the other side of the fence, because he would get free relief, and still have a chance to win the tourney. 
 

The only criteria for free relief from that spot is not being “clearly unreasonable”. The way the ball was up against the fence, ANY player could have gone to the other side and whacked a 5-iron against the fence and the ball would have AT LEAST moved to where he eventually had a drop. He should have been entitled to a free drop as his ball was ALREADY in that sand. Even if it didn’t move very far, it would have moved away from the fence and maybe further into the sand, which he would have gotten relief from. 
 

To say a tour pro couldn’t, “reasonably”, pull off that shot is silly. These guys are magic. I could have hit that shot. So it was clearly a reasonable shot. 
 

The “unreasonable” part is I don’t think the Ref thought Valmaki could scale the fence to play the shot. He’s not exactly skinny. In effect, the Ref was fat-shaming Valmaki as they allowed a much thinner golfer to get that free relief earlier that was denied Valmaki. 
 

Sad really. 

Edited March 1 by Augster