Committee and Red Staked Penalty Area????

[Shilgy]

3 hours ago, Newby said:

There is a club near me which has a large lawn between the back of the 18th green and the clubhouse terrace. The paved terrace is white lined as OB. The flower beds in the lawn are not marked but a published LR says 'The flower beds between the 18th green and the terrace are GUR' accompanied by the relief procedure (in this case DZs).

Some few years ago, as a result of a query by an enthusiastic newly qualified referee it was referred to and approved by the R&A

I am very surprised they have the flower bed as GUR and not a NPZ.  Just white line the flower bed instead.  Of course then they would likely need to reapply the paint more often

[Newby]

1 hour ago, Shilgy said:

I am very surprised they have the flower bed as GUR and not a NPZ.  Just white line the flower bed instead.  Of course then they would likely need to reapply the paint more often

Sorry, they are NPZ based on an area of ACC/GUR. I missed that in adding the point about DZs

[Mr. Bean]

3 hours ago, Augster said:

The mown lines are precise. It’s kind of the point. The mower can only go so close to bushes, woods, prairie grass etc. 

 

It would have shortened this discussion dramatically had you mentioned this piece of information in the very beginning. It is like asking for a ruling but not telling all the relevant facts 😎

[bcjim]

On 4/25/2024 at 4:35 PM, Augster said:

Short answer, yes. 
 

In our local rules we specify that any area of the course, staked or not, that is “not usually mown” is designated a red penalty area. Long grass, woods, under large trees, etc. Anywhere you might lose a ball, really. 
 

It’s one part of one hole. I wouldn’t worry about the adjusted rating. In fact, if the RPA is designated instead of what usually happens in that area, I’m guessing a lost ball, the rating will actually be marginally easier. Areas over greens minimally add into hole ratings. Most players under club or mishit. The only time they go over is dead skulls. 
 

That sounds a little extreme to me. We do similar but RPA is mostly clearly defined as the native areas (knee high+ grass and bushes) bordering most holes on one or both sides. Pretty much anywhere beyond the primary rough. But not just near random trees growing in the rough or amongst a stand of tall trees between 2 parallel fairways where no grass is growing.  Our RPAs are often not well marked with lines or stakes but everyone knows where the border is.

[Mr. Bean]

1 hour ago, bcjim said:

Our RPAs are often not well marked with lines or stakes but everyone knows where the border is.

 

How?

[bcjim]

15 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

How?

The sharp transition from mowed 3 inch rough to 24 inch tall jungle gives it away. 

[Mr. Bean]

27 minutes ago, bcjim said:

The sharp transition from mowed 3 inch rough to 24 inch tall jungle gives it away. 

 

Personally I feel that having a margin of an area defined between 3" and 24" grass is far from accurate. A ball can embed into that 3" grass so deep that it is virtually impossible to say whether it touches the taller grass or not. Not to mention that with such height the mowing accuracy is somewhat questionable. But I can understand that if the management of a course is not at all interested in managing the course properly such cheap solutions can be chosen.

 

Edited May 1 by Mr. Bean

[bobfoster]

I'm far from someone that would claim to be a rules expert, but this seems sort of academic. There are either stakes or there are not. Boundary/OB conditions are either determined by the course committee, or they don't exist (for handicap index purposes).

 

Casual "groups" can play by whatever informal rules they all agree to (something that is pretty common - I have one group I play with that goes by "one Mulligan on the front, one on the back"), but unless those "groups" are composed of the majority of the recognized course committee, and the stakes are positioned within the constraints of the RoG, then the scores are not suitable for Ghin (i.e., a local course committee can't just randomly stick red or yellow stakes in the ground anywhere they feel like it, nor declare Mulligans to be a local rule, etc., etc.). Course committees do have some leeway, but it is by no means absolute. And informal groups have no authority at all (if they want their scores recognized for formal handicap purposes). 

 

I fear I might be seriously missing some nuances here, but doesn't this question seem pretty straightforward? Then again,

 

Edited May 1 by bobfoster

[bobfoster]

I'm far from someone that would claim to be a rules expert, but this seems sort of academic. There are either stakes or there are not. Boundary/OB conditions are either determined by the course committee, or they don't exist (for handicap index purposes).

 

Casual "groups" can play by whatever informal rules they all agree to (something that is pretty common - I have one group I play with that goes by "one Mulligan on the front, one on the back"), but unless those "groups" are composed of the majority of the recognized course committee, and the stakes are positioned within the constraints of the RoG, then the scores are not suitable for Ghin (i.e., a local course committee can't just randomly stick red or yellow stakes in the ground anywhere they feel like it, nor declare Mulligans to be a local rule, etc., etc.). Course committees do have some leeway, but it is by no means absolute. And informal groups have no authority at all (if they want their scores recognized for formal handicap purposes). 

 

Really, I'd say (in practice) there are three general categories of golfers. Serious ones that play by (and know) the strict RoG and keep a formal, legitimate handicap. Semi-serious ones that know most of the (somewhat convoluted) RoG, and try to play by them most of the time (though are willing to "bend" them when the mood hits). And casual golfers that sort of know the half dozen general rules, and usually play by them (though are totally fine with Mulligans and foot wedges and 6 foot "gimme's"). And on the whole, having played golf with countless people over five decades, the last category is by far the largest. And I'm fine with that - I play my game, and don't care what game anyone else wants to play. 

 

Most golfers are "casual". And I fear I might be seriously missing some nuances here with the OP's question. But doesn't this question seem pretty straightforward? Good grief, no

"single person" can plant red stakes. That's just not how our handicap system works. Then again,

 

[Halebopp]

On 4/30/2024 at 6:14 AM, Augster said:

If one of these committees wants the outside of the course to play as RPA, for pace of play, they just local rule it and make the white stakes red. They don’t physically go out there and remove the white stakes and replace them with red stakes. They make a LR on THEIR hard card that says, “white stakes on the left of 18 will be played as RPA”. 

 

How can a random committee decide you are allowed to play your ball from a neighbour's backyard, for example? And certainly you cannot play qualifying rounds as you'd be playing a different course than the one that has been rated.

[nsxguy]

14 hours ago, bobfoster said:

There are either stakes or there are not. Boundary/OB conditions are either determined by the course committee, or they don't exist (for handicap index purposes).

 

It's a bit more complicated than that. Look at the definition of "Penalty Area".

 

Part of which is "When the edge of a body of water is not defined by the Committee, the edge of that penalty area is defined by its natural boundaries (that is, where the ground slopes down to form the depression that can hold the water)"

 

Here is SoFla there are quite a few PAs whose boundary is defined exactly that way.