Tough ruling, whats your opinion?

[stevowpappas]

I have a ruling question that happened to me in a tournament this weekend.

 

I teed off and assumed that my drive went into a water hazard (marked red). We searched around and could not find the ball so i took a drop in what I thought was the line of entry. I played the hole out, teed off on the next hole and then found out my drive on the previous hole was actually in play.

 

I DQ'ed myself after this but I want to be sure that what I did was correct.

 

 

 

Thanks for the help

[DrSchteeve]

Before you took the drop, you should have been certain that the ball was in the hazard. If you were certain, the drop was the appropriate penalty. If you weren't certain, you should have gone back and re-teed.

 

Obviously, even if you were certain the ball was in the hazard, you were wrong. I think the correct action depends on your certainty level. If you were certain, despite being wrong, I don't think any penalty would apply.

 

If you weren't certain, you shouldn't have taken the drop, and some additional penalty (not sure if that would be disqualification) would apply.

[Bomb and Gouge]

Da rules is da rules.

 

Never assume anything!

[stevowpappas]

This is my home course that I play 100 times per year for the last 15 years. Trust me I was certain it went in (it was a brand new ball and had a huge scuff mark on it, it must have hit something in the hazard and shot out) but I do not believe being certain is part of the rules and does make my case an exception. From what I have read in the rules book is:

 

"Decision 26-1/1, you will find "a player may NOT deem his ball lost in a water hazard simply because he thinks the ball may be in the hazard."

 

 

then you get this

 

Relief for Ball in Water Hazard It is a question of fact whether a ball lost after having been struck toward a water hazard is lost inside or outside the hazard. In order to treat the ball as lost in the hazard, there must be reasonable evidence that the ball lodged in it. In the absence of such evidence, the ball must be treated as a lost ball and Rule 27 applies.

 

 

In my case the ball flying 20 yards deep into the hazard was enough reasonable evidence for me.

 

 

So I feel that if I would have treated it as a lost ball rather than being in the hazard (re-teeing instead of taking a drop) then I would be fine. However Im still not 100% sure this is the case.

[jaskanski]

Sorry, the penalty for not correcting your error before starting the next hole is DQ. In any case, you cannot assume that a ball has entered a water hazard. You should have annouced a provisional to be safe. Whether or not it went in the hazard is a matter of fact. Without reasonable evidence to support your assumption, you cannot envoke rule 26-1. If you could not establish wether or not the ball entered the water, you should have proceeded under the lost ball rule 27 and replayed your last shot. Subsequently finding your ball on the next hole would have been irrelevant, even with a provisional ball. By putting a ball in play under the water hazard rule 26, you were effectively playing from the wrong place - failure to correct the error before holing out is DQ in strokeplay or loss of hole in matchplay.

[stevowpappas]

Thanks a bunch! Im glad I did the right thing. It was in the Club championship and I had a very good chance at winning, a lot of the members told me not to worry about it and just keep playing but I really thought it was a DQ and couldnt keep playing knowing so.

 

Thanks again

[hbear]

I was under the impression tht you cannot hit a provisional if you believe you ball went into a water hazard.

 

27-2. Provisional Ball a. Procedure

 

If a ball may be lost outside a water hazard or may be out of bounds, to save time the player may play another ball provisionally in accordance with Rule 27-1. The player must inform his opponent in match play or his marker or a fellow-competitor in stroke play that he intends to play a provisional ball, and he must play it before he or his partner goes forward to search for the original ball.

 

If he fails to do so and plays another ball, that ball is not a provisional ball and becomes the ball in play under penalty of stroke and distance (Rule 27-1); the original ball is lost.

If you were to play a try to play a "provisional" for a ball you believe was lost inside a water hazard....that ball would now be in play.

 

27-2/1 Provisional Ball Serving as Ball in Play If Original Ball Unplayable or in Water Hazard

 

Q. May a player announce that a second ball he is going to play is both (a) a provisional ball in case the original ball is lost outside a water hazard or out of bounds and (b) the ball in play in case the original ball is unplayable or in a water hazard?

 

A. No.

 

27-2a/2 Provisional Ball Played Solely in Belief Original Ball Might Be in Water Hazard

 

Q. A player’s tee shot might be in a water hazard, but clearly it is not lost outside a water hazard or out of bounds. The player announces that, since his ball might be in the hazard, he is going to play a provisional ball and he does so. Rule 27-2a seems to prohibit a provisional ball in the circumstances. What is the ruling?

 

A. The player did not play a provisional ball which, according to the Definition of “Provisional Ball,” is a ball played under Rule 27-2 for a ball which may be lost outside a water hazard or may be out of bounds. The second ball from the tee was in play since it was not a provisional ball.

 

It's happened to me in a tournament...where I "thought" by ball might be in a lateral hazard....but wasn't 100% sure as there were some trees/brush just before the lateral hazard.

So knowing the rule, I couldn't hit a provisional.....went to search around the lateral hazard...couldn't be sure my ball was in it.

Went back and re-teed.

 

However to complicate things further....if you are playing a "provisional" because you "believe" your ball might be lost outside a water hazard....

 

27-2a/2.2 Possibility That Original Ball Is in Water Hazard May Not Preclude Play of Provisional Ball

 

Q. If a player’s original ball may have come to rest in a water hazard, is he precluded from playing a provisional ball?

 

A. No. Even though the original ball may be in a water hazard, the player is entitled to play a provisional ball if the original ball might also be lost outside the water hazard or out of bounds. In such a case, if the original ball is found in the water hazard, the provisional ball must be abandoned — Rule 27-2c (Formerly 27-2c/1)

 

27-2a/2.5 Player Plays Provisional Ball in Belief Original Ball Might Be Lost Outside Water Hazard Then Discovers There

Is No Possibility of Its Being Lost Outside Water Hazard

 

Q. A player’s tee shot is struck towards an area of trees, bushes and tall grass. Believing his ball might be lost outside a water hazard, the player announces his intention to play a provisional ball and plays a ball from the tee. When he arrives at the area, he finds that the area in question is wetlands that has been defined as a lateral water hazard and that it is known or virtually certain that his ball is in it. What is the ruling?

 

A. As the player played the second ball from the tee in the belief that his original ball might be lost outside a water hazard, that ball was a provisional ball. The subsequent discovery that the area in question is in fact a lateral water hazard is irrelevant. Therefore, the player must abandon the provisional ball and proceed under Rule 26-1 — see Rule 27-2c. (Revised)

[kurob]

Sorry, the penalty for not correcting your error before starting the next hole is DQ. In any case, you cannot assume that a ball has entered a water hazard. You should have annouced a provisional to be safe. Whether or not it went in the hazard is a matter of fact. Without reasonable evidence to support your assumption, you cannot envoke rule 26-1. If you could not establish wether or not the ball entered the water, you should have proceeded under the lost ball rule 27 and replayed your last shot. Subsequently finding your ball on the next hole would have been irrelevant, even with a provisional ball. By putting a ball in play under the water hazard rule 26, you were effectively playing from the wrong place - failure to correct the error before holing out is DQ in strokeplay or loss of hole in matchplay.

Seeing the ball fly into the hazard is pretty reasonable evidence, even if he didn't see it ricochet out.

 

That said, I'd have DQ'd myself, too.

[jjj912]

If it was known or virtually certain (this is the new phrase for reasonable evidence) that the ball was in the hazard, then you DQ'd unnecessarily. If you played without being virtually certain then you were subject to a DQ. The DQ depends on whether or not you committed a serious breach of the Rules.

 

26-1/3.5 Ball Dropped Under Water Hazard Rule with Knowledge or Virtual Certainty; Original Ball Then Found

 

Q. A player’s ball is struck towards a water hazard. It is known or virtually certain that the player’s ball is in the water hazard, and he drops a ball under Rule 26-1b. Before he plays the dropped ball, his original ball is found within the five-minute search period. What is the ruling?

 

A. As it was known or virtually certain that the ball was in the water hazard when the player put the substituted ball into play, that ball was correctly substituted and he may not play the original ball.

...

In the unlikely event that the original ball was found outside the water hazard, the player must continue with the dropped ball under penalty of one stroke (Rule 26-1). (Revised)

[Dill Pickleson]

so basically what you guys are saying is if you dont actually see the splash than its a re tee?

[jjj912]

Not at all. Actually, seeing a splash isn't necessarily sufficient. Here is the decision related to Known or Virtually Certain. I think the key thing here is not to overthink the situtation.

 

26-1/1 Meaning of “Known or Virtually Certain”

If a ball has been struck towards a water hazard and has not been found, the term “known or virtually certain” indicates the level of confidence that the ball is in the water hazard that is required for the player to proceed under Rule 26-1. A player may not assume that his ball is in a water hazard simply because there is a possibility that the ball may be in the hazard. If it is not known that the ball is in the water hazard, in order for the player to proceed under Rule 26-1 there must be almost no doubt that the ball is in the hazard. Otherwise, a ball that cannot be found must be considered lost outside the hazard and the player must proceed under Rule 27-1.

 

All available evidence must be taken into account in determining whether knowledge or virtual certainty exists, including any testimony and the physical conditions in the area around the water hazard. For example, if a water hazard is surrounded by a fairway on which a ball could hardly be lost, there exists a greater certainty that the ball is in the hazard than there would be if there were deep rough in the area. Observing a ball splash in a water hazard would not necessarily provide knowledge or virtual certainty as to the location of the ball as sometimes such a ball may skip out of a hazard.

 

The same principle would apply for a ball that may have been moved by an outside agency (Rule 18-1) or a ball that has not been found and may be in an obstruction (Rule 24-3) or an abnormal ground condition (Rule 25-1c). (Revised)

[slim16er]

My head hurts

[jaskanski]

If it was known or virtually certain (this is the new phrase for reasonable evidence) that the ball was in the hazard, then you DQ'd unnecessarily. If you played without being virtually certain then you were subject to a DQ. The DQ depends on whether or not you committed a serious breach of the Rules.

 

26-1/3.5 Ball Dropped Under Water Hazard Rule with Knowledge or Virtual Certainty; Original Ball Then Found

 

Q. A player's ball is struck towards a water hazard. It is known or virtually certain that the player's ball is in the water hazard, and he drops a ball under Rule 26-1b. Before he plays the dropped ball, his original ball is found within the five-minute search period. What is the ruling?

 

A. As it was known or virtually certain that the ball was in the water hazard when the player put the substituted ball into play, that ball was correctly substituted and he may not play the original ball.

...

In the unlikely event that the original ball was found outside the water hazard, the player must continue with the dropped ball under penalty of one stroke (Rule 26-1). (Revised)

 

Yes, but in this case the (wrong) ball was holed out before the original ball was found.

[DrSchteeve]

If it was known or virtually certain (this is the new phrase for reasonable evidence) that the ball was in the hazard, then you DQ'd unnecessarily. If you played without being virtually certain then you were subject to a DQ. The DQ depends on whether or not you committed a serious breach of the Rules.

 

26-1/3.5 Ball Dropped Under Water Hazard Rule with Knowledge or Virtual Certainty; Original Ball Then Found

 

Q. A player's ball is struck towards a water hazard. It is known or virtually certain that the player's ball is in the water hazard, and he drops a ball under Rule 26-1b. Before he plays the dropped ball, his original ball is found within the five-minute search period. What is the ruling?

 

A. As it was known or virtually certain that the ball was in the water hazard when the player put the substituted ball into play, that ball was correctly substituted and he may not play the original ball.

...

In the unlikely event that the original ball was found outside the water hazard, the player must continue with the dropped ball under penalty of one stroke (Rule 26-1). (Revised)

 

Yes, but in this case the (wrong) ball was holed out before the original ball was found.

 

SOOOO.... this would then seem to suggest that the correct ruling would have been to take an additional stroke penalty at the time that the original ball was found (since it was found after playing the dropped ball).

[jaskanski]

Nooo.. it was HOLED before finding the original ball. If the hole had been completed WITH the original ball, he could've got away with 1 penalty drop + 2 shot penalty=3.

[1day2day]

What was around the water hazard, ie long grass,fairway only etc?

[jjj912]

That the ball was holed out prior to finding the original ball is irrelevant.

 

Assuming it was known or virtually certain the ball was in the hazard, once the player dropped a ball behind the hazard, that ball was the ball in play and the original ball was lost. There is just one penalty stroke here and that is the penalty for taking relief from the water hazard.

 

Now, if it wasn't known or virtually certain that the ball was in the water hazard, that's a different story. Since the player could not find his ball and it wasn't known or virtually certain to be in the hazard, the applicable Rule is the Lost Ball rule. Under that Rule the player incurs a stroke and distance penalty. Since he dropped a ball behind the hazard and subsequently made a stroke at that ball, which was not permitted under the Lost Ball rule, he played from the wrong place. The penalty for playing from the wrong place is two strokes under the applicable Rule (i.e. the Lost Ball rule). Since he may have committed a serious breach of the rules, he should have then corrected the error via Rule 20-7c. There are three penalty strokes altogether in this situation: one for the lost ball and two for playing from the wrong place. Not correcting his error subjects him to a DQ by the Committee.

[jjj912]

Nooo.. it was HOLED before finding the original ball. If the hole had been completed WITH the original ball, he could've got away with 1 penalty drop + 2 shot penalty=3.

 

I don't understand. If he had holed out with his original ball (the original ball being the one hit from the teeing grounds), then there would be no penalty strokes to assess.

[777twist]

First off, I personally thought when reading this that stevowpappas DQ'ed himself unfiarly. And I thought the fact he "assumed" his ball went into the hazard would be enough evidence to proceed under the Water Hazard rule. It may be symantics with "Assumed" and "Virtually Certain"...he backed up his statement by saying he's played this course 100 times a year for like 15 years. Maybe it's a matter of how he posed his argument by saying "assumed" when maybe he meant "Virtually Certain."

 

I hit a ball the other day that I know I can only hit 165 yards even on a skull (normally should go about 140 - 155) and it was struck toward a water hazard, but the hazard's water line is like 5 feet lower than the fairway. So the chance of my seeing a spash was pretty thin. Also, my eyes aren't great over 130 yards (sucks when my bros point out chicks that are 150 yards away...I can't see crap!), but I checked around the hazard where my ball flight was and I was "virtually certain" the ball was in the hazard. Now, maybe in a tournament I may get called out for using the wrong language of "I think it's in the hazard" or "I assume it in the hazard"...but when I say that, I'm basically saying I DON'T think it's outside the hazard.

 

Personally I think jjj912 is right on the money... I read this rule not too long ago and that's how I thought it was.

 

I think Jaskanski is holding on to the part of the decision where it says "the original was found before the drop was played"...but I'm not sure that matters, as I thought there was a rule about dropping your ball where you think your ball crossed the margin and you can't be penalized if your ball is found somewhere else in the hazard, as well as you can't take the benefit from the additional distance if it helps.

 

But maybe this one needs to be research further... at this point I'm siding with jjj912.

 

BTW, I think the spirit of the rule would have been for him to play from his drop with his one stroke penalty... DQ'ing seems harsh when I have seen balls hit the water and bounce out...I'm not talking a skiff...I'm talking like it must of hit a turtles back or something cuz it popped out at a perfect angle to be dry.

 

Maybe they should make the rule that you need to declare your "virtual certainty" before you move on from where you hit. So you hit, it heads toward the water hazard...you say "I certain that's in the hazard" then you get up there if you can't find it...it's in. If you find it, you can play it. That way people can't just wait until they get up to the hazard to say, geeze it must be in there. It may not sound like a differnce, but it kind of is. Cuz if you don't announce before you go looking and you can't find it, then it has to be treated as a lost ball.

 

My 2 cents...although it was more like a buck twenty five.

 

Twist

[KevCarter]

I think you have nailed this one Twist.

 

26-1/3.5 Ball Dropped Under Water Hazard Rule with Knowledge or Virtual Certainty; Original Ball Then Found

 

Q. A player’s ball is struck towards a water hazard. It is known or virtually certain that the player’s ball is in the water hazard, and he drops a ball under Rule 26-1b. Before he plays the dropped ball, his original ball is found within the five-minute search period. What is the ruling?

 

A. As it was known or virtually certain that the ball was in the water hazard when the player put the substituted ball into play, that ball was correctly substituted and he may not play the original ball.

 

If the original ball was found in the water hazard and this discovery affects the reference point for proceeding under Rule 26-1b, resulting in the substituted ball having been dropped in a wrong place, the player must correct the error under Rule 20-6. The player must proceed in accordance with any of the applicable options under Rule 26-1 with respect to the correct reference point (see Decisions 20-6/2 and 26-1/16). Otherwise, Rule 20-6 does not apply and the player must continue play with the dropped ball. In either case, the player incurs a penalty of one stroke under Rule 26-1.

 

In the unlikely event that the original ball was found outside the water hazard, the player must continue with the dropped ball under penalty of one stroke (Rule 26-1). (Revised)

[mihi4]

A. As it was known or virtually certain that the ball was in the water hazard when the player put the substituted ball into play, that ball was correctly substituted and he may not play the original ball.

...

In the unlikely event that the original ball was found outside the water hazard, the player must continue with the dropped ball under penalty of one stroke (Rule 26-1). (Revised)

I think these are the important points here - the DQ is not correct IMHO.

Since stevowpappas was "virtually certain", that the ball is in the hazard, the drop of the new ball was legal and made his original ball out of play.

It's just 1 stroke penalty according to the water hazard rule...

 

greetings

michi

[777twist]

I think the actual rule that applies to this situation is:

 

"26-1/3 Ball Played Under Water Hazard Rule; Original Ball Then Found Outside Hazard

 

Q. A player believed his original ball had come to rest in a water hazard. He searched for about a minute but did not find his ball. He therefore dropped another ball behind the hazard under Rule 26-1 and played it. He then found his original ball outside the hazard within five minutes of having begun to search for it. What is the ruling?

 

A. When the player dropped and played another ball behind the hazard, it became the ball in play and the original ball was lost.

 

If it was known or virtually certain that the original ball was in the water hazard, the player was entitled to invoke Rule 26-1. In the absence of knowledge or virtual certainty that the original ball was in the water hazard, the player was required to put another ball into play under Rule 27-1. In playing the ball dropped under Rule 26-1, the player played from a wrong place.

 

In match play, he incurred a penalty of loss of hole (Rule 20-7b).

 

In stroke play, he incurred the stroke-and-distance penalty prescribed by Rule 27-1 and an additional penalty of two strokes for a breach of that Rule (Rule 20-7c). If the breach was a serious one, he was subject to disqualification unless he corrected the error as provided in Rule 20-7c. (Revised)"

The reason I think this rule is better is because "Stevowpappas" actually played the 2nd ball, and then his original was found.

 

I guess the question is this... Did anyone else say they didn't think the ball was in the water...and were you (Stevowpappas) virtually certain it was in the water. If no one else claimed "it's not in the water" and you were "virtually certain" then you DQ'ed yourself for no reason.

 

The rule doesn't really explain who can make a claim against your "virtual certainty" and thus prevent you from invoking rule 26.1, but I'm guessing short of them finding the ball before you drop and hit, they don't have much recourse.

 

BTW, I mentioned this to my buddy and he was kindof in awe that "Stevowpappas" DQ'ed himself. Shouldn't he have asked a rules official or the committee or someone first!?

 

 

LAST THING... I guess the difference in the two decisions that Kev and I posted is one you dropped and the ball was found before you hit. Thus, you must correct your error or you are playing from wrong place which carries the 1 stroke penalty for the rule and the extra 2 strokes for breach of the rule. If the ball is dropped and hit and then the discovery of the original is found, it's out-of-play and you take the normal 1 stroke water hazard penalty.

[sigmapete1]

If it was known or virtually certain (this is the new phrase for reasonable evidence) that the ball was in the hazard, then you DQ'd unnecessarily. If you played without being virtually certain then you were subject to a DQ. The DQ depends on whether or not you committed a serious breach of the Rules.

 

26-1/3.5 Ball Dropped Under Water Hazard Rule with Knowledge or Virtual Certainty; Original Ball Then Found

 

Q. A player's ball is struck towards a water hazard. It is known or virtually certain that the player's ball is in the water hazard, and he drops a ball under Rule 26-1b. Before he plays the dropped ball, his original ball is found within the five-minute search period. What is the ruling?

 

A. As it was known or virtually certain that the ball was in the water hazard when the player put the substituted ball into play, that ball was correctly substituted and he may not play the original ball.

...

In the unlikely event that the original ball was found outside the water hazard, the player must continue with the dropped ball under penalty of one stroke (Rule 26-1). (Revised)

 

Yes, but in this case the (wrong) ball was holed out before the original ball was found.

 

I believe that according to the above ruling, as long as it is "virtually certain" that the ball was in the hazard, then it doesn't matter whether it was actually in the hazard or not(this is of course assuming that the OP was virtually certain). Once the drop from the hazard is made, then that is the ball in play and he is then hitting 3 from the drop. Whatever is found afterward is irrelevant.

 

Let me explain it with a hypothetical: What if the same thing happened and the OP found his ball with his mark a day later after the tournament was concluded? It seems to me that a DQ at that point would be ridiculous. But that is the same as what we have here. So long as there is no dispute about him being "virtually certain" then he appropriately dropped and played.

 

I think this language is used to make the rules realistic rather than unduly harsh by DQing a player for essentially following the rules according to what facts he had at the time. How does he know that the ball didn't land in the hazard and wasn't subsequently carried out by an animal (or maybe another player on the other hole who pulled it from the hazard looked at the ball, realized it wasn't his and dropped it). That's why the "virtually certain" language exists, to allow players to continue playing without having to be 100% certain before hitting their next shot.

[777twist]

Once the drop from the hazard is made, then that is the ball in play and he is then hitting 3 from the drop. Whatever is found afterward is irrelevant.

 

 

I'm not 100%, but 99% that if you make your drop, but then find the ball, you have to correct the position of the drop. You are still dropping, but you must drop at the correct place if your ball is found before you hit. I would go look it up, but I'm in a hurry. I will post the rule when I find it.

 

Twist

[KevCarter]

No need to look up the rule again. It's all posted in this thread. We all had it right before the thread was reopened, now you guys are heading down the wrong path. Please look again at decisions:

 

26-1/3

26-1/3.5

26-1/3.7 (in case KVC was absent)

 

Kevin

[777twist]

No need to look up the rule again. It's all posted in this thread. We all had it right before the thread was reopened, now you guys are heading down the wrong path. Please look again at decisions:

 

26-1/3

26-1/3.5

26-1/3.7 (in case KVC was absent)

 

Kevin

 

Kev's right, we did all post this before. Just check his post #21, it has the language I was talking about. My main point was about the fact that the poster above me said once you drop it's all over. My point is, if someone finds your ball in the hazard before you hit, you need to redrop at the propper place. But I agree with Kev, all the rules are posted in this thread already.

[KevCarter]

No need to look up the rule again. It's all posted in this thread. We all had it right before the thread was reopened, now you guys are heading down the wrong path. Please look again at decisions:

 

26-1/3

26-1/3.5

26-1/3.7 (in case KVC was absent)

 

Kevin

 

Kev's right, we did all post this before. Just check his post #21, it has the language I was talking about. My main point was about the fact that the poster above me said once you drop it's all over. My point is, if someone finds your ball in the hazard before you hit, you need to redrop at the propper place. But I agree with Kev, all the rules are posted in this thread already.

 

Twist,

 

Good catch, if the ball is found in the hazard it is a different ruling, possibly, from a ball found outside the hazard after KVC is determined. You are getting really good at this. You have come a VERY long way in a VERY short time!

 

Kevin

[jjj912]

If it is known or virtually certain that the ball is in the hazard and the player drops under the Rule 26 (Water Hazard), the dropped ball becomes the ball in play. The player does not have to make a stroke at the dropped ball to make it the ball in play. It is in play as soon as it is dropped. The original ball is lost and its location is irrelevant.

[KevCarter]

If it is known or virtually certain that the ball is in the hazard and the player drops under the Rule 26 (Water Hazard), the dropped ball becomes the ball in play. The player does not have to make a stroke at the dropped ball to make it the ball in play. It is in play as soon as it is dropped. The original ball is lost and its location is irrelevant.

 

Incorrect in this case:

 

26-1/3.5 Ball Dropped Under Water Hazard Rule with Knowledge or Virtual Certainty; Original Ball Then Found

 

Q. A player’s ball is struck towards a water hazard. It is known or virtually certain that the player’s ball is in the water hazard, and he drops a ball under Rule 26-1b. Before he plays the dropped ball, his original ball is found within the five-minute search period. What is the ruling?

 

A. As it was known or virtually certain that the ball was in the water hazard when the player put the substituted ball into play, that ball was correctly substituted and he may not play the original ball.

 

If the original ball was found in the water hazard and this discovery affects the reference point for proceeding under Rule 26-1b, resulting in the substituted ball having been dropped in a wrong place, the player must correct the error under Rule 20-6. The player must proceed in accordance with any of the applicable options under Rule 26-1 with respect to the correct reference point (see Decisions 20-6/2 and 26-1/16). Otherwise, Rule 20-6 does not apply and the player must continue play with the dropped ball. In either case, the player incurs a penalty of one stroke under Rule 26-1.

 

In the unlikely event that the original ball was found outside the water hazard, the player must continue with the dropped ball under penalty of one stroke (Rule 26-1). (Revised)

[jjj912]

Good catch. :swoon2: At first I was inclinded to think that the decision should be reconsidered because it didn't seem consistent with other decisions. After thinking on it for a bit, I think I agree with it.