New Local Rule at my club

[luxman]

Trying to improve pace of play

I'm curious of opinions of a local rule just put in at my club. Mind you, this comes off of the heels of a 5 1/2 hour tournament round and recent weekend rounds exceeding 4 1/2 hours. While this is not a cureall for the problem, I don't think it can hurt and wonder if this is a rule that should be considered beyond my club...

New Local Rule
The following local rule will be in effect immediately:
"If there is doubt whether a ball is in or is lost in a water hazard (including a lateral water hazard), the player may play another ball provisionally under any of the applicable options in Rule 26-1.
If the original ball is found outside the water hazard, the player must continue play with it.
If the original ball is found in the water hazard, the player may either play the original ball as it lies or continue with the ball played provisionally under rule 26-1.

If the original ball is not found or identified, the player must continue with the ball played provisionally.
Penalty for breach of local rule:
Match Play - Loss of hole; Stroke play - Two strokes."

[HitEmTrue]

Would be helpful in situations where you can't find out if your ball is in the hazard until you get to the other side.

I wonder if it is against USGA rules to make such a local rule.

[BFid]

So, if you hit a ball and you're not sure if it's in the water, hit a provisional, and then you actually FIND your ball rolled in the water, a drop is not an option? But if you know it is in the water hazard you're allowed to drop? Doesn't make much sense to me.

I don't really see how this saves time, especially with the words "may play another ball provisionally". Should this read "must"?

Maybe it would save time on figuring out some of the lateral water hazard drop zones, but in a normal water hazard, having to take stroke and distance (no option to drop), seems silly. Possible i'm not understanding the reasoning behind the rule, though.

[luxman]

[quote name='BFid' timestamp='1287682575' post='2752835']
So, if you hit a ball and you're not sure if it's in the water, hit a provisional, and then you actually FIND your ball rolled in the water, a drop is not an option? But if you know it is in the water hazard you're allowed to drop? Doesn't make much sense to me.

I don't really see how this saves time, especially with the words "may play another ball provisionally". Should this read "must"?

Maybe it would save time on figuring out some of the lateral water hazard drop zones, but in a normal water hazard, having to take stroke and distance (no option to drop), seems silly. Possible i'm not understanding the reasoning behind the rule, though.
[/quote]

There are a few holes where you cannot tell for certain if the ball cleared the hazard or not (all of these are marked by red stakes). By playing a provisional it saves time by not driving past the hazard to find that the ball didn't clear only to then drive back to drop and hit.

[LUMA]

I do this anyways. That or I go where it was lost and just drop a new ball and move on.

[OpusX20]

[quote name='luxman' timestamp='1287676442' post='2752685']
I'm curious of opinions of a local rule just put in at my club. Mind you, this comes off of the heels of a 5 1/2 hour tournament round and recent weekend rounds exceeding 4 1/2 hours. While this is not a cureall for the problem, I don't think it can hurt and wonder if this is a rule that should be considered beyond my club...

New Local Rule
The following local rule will be in effect immediately:
"If there is doubt whether a ball is in or is lost in a water hazard (including a lateral water hazard), the player may play another ball provisionally under any of the applicable options in Rule 26-1.
If the original ball is found outside the water hazard, the player must continue play with it.
If the original ball is found in the water hazard, the player may either play the original ball as it lies or continue with the ball played provisionally under rule 26-1.

If the original ball is not found or identified, the player must continue with the ball played provisionally.
Penalty for breach of local rule:
Match Play - Loss of hole; Stroke play - Two strokes."
[/quote]

I'm probably being predictable here, but I am not in favor of the Committee making any local rule that is in obvious violation of a basic Rule of Golf. Even for a cause as noble as speeding up play, there shoud be other ways to accomplish this outside of violating Rules 27 and 33.

[Sawgrass]

It's not clear to me from the description, but it seems to say that you forfit your other water hazard relief options if you hit the provisional. If that's so, I'd never hit the provisional, but rather wait and see what I wanted to do. I could always go back and take a stroke and distance.

If you do not forfit your other options, then I don't like the proposed rule at all. It gives you the choice to select an outcome that's already been decided (the provisional's location) or an new choice. That's a very bad rule modification IMO.

I'd rather play a slow round.

[luxman]

[quote name='Sawgrass' timestamp='1287683973' post='2752875']
It's not clear to me from the description, but it seems to say that you forfit your other water hazard relief options if you hit the provisional. If that's so, I'd never hit the provisional, but rather wait and see what I wanted to do. I could always go back and take a stroke and distance.

If you do not forfit your other options, then I don't like the proposed rule at all. It gives you the choice to select an outcome that's already been decided (the provisional's location) or an new choice. That's a very bad rule modification IMO.

I'd rather play a slow round.
[/quote]

I do hear what you are saying and agree with you to a point. However, if it helps speed play up, I'll take it over the 5 1/2 hour tournament round which has become the norm. That said, the best way to combat slow play is to actually enforce the USGA rules and give players a warning, 1 stroke penalty, 2 stroke penalty and then DQ. There's no excuse for a 5 1/2 hour round of golf.

[HitEmTrue]

[quote name='Sawgrass' timestamp='1287683973' post='2752875']
It's not clear to me from the description, but it seems to say that you forfit your other water hazard relief options if you hit the provisional.
[/quote]

The provisional does not have to be from where the previous shot was taken.

[quote]the player may play another ball provisionally under any of the applicable options in Rule 26-1. [/quote]

So if the shot looks like it may (or may not) have made it across, you could go up to the hazard and drop in the appropriate location to hit the provisional.

[Fore_Man]

Tell them to increase the increments of their tee times by 3 minutes or so. That way if and when this happens (which must be often if they put in a rule) there is enough breathing room between groups to play by the rules of golf.

My local course has a lot of water and does not have a quick pace of play usually. They moved out the tee times by 3 mins each. Resulting in less total # of golfers, but quicker rounds with less waiting. Sometimes the course needs to suck it up and do a little customer service instead of being greedy and trying to squeeze the most golfers as they can on the course on any given day.

[Newby]

[quote name='HitEmTrue' timestamp='1287679666' post='2752756']
I wonder if it is against USGA rules to make such a local rule.
[/quote]

This is a Local Rule authorised by the R&A/USGA
Appendix I Part B 1

It should however only be used if the following applies:

Ball Played Provisionally Under Rule [url="http://www.usga.org/workarea/linkit.aspx?linkidentifier=id&itemid=14304#26-1"]26-1[/url]Permitting play of a ball provisionally under Rule [url="http://www.usga.org/workarea/linkit.aspx?linkidentifier=id&itemid=14304#26-1"]26-1[/url] for a ball that may be in a [url="http://www.usga.org/workarea/linkit.aspx?linkidentifier=id&itemid=14253#WaterHazard"][i]water hazard[/i][/url] (including a [url="http://www.usga.org/workarea/linkit.aspx?linkidentifier=id&itemid=14253#LateralWaterHazard"][i]lateral water hazard[/i][/url]) of such character that, if the original ball is not found, it is known or virtually certain that it is in the [url="http://www.usga.org/workarea/linkit.aspx?linkidentifier=id&itemid=14253#WaterHazard"][i]water hazard[/i][/url] and it would be impracticable to determine whether the ball is in the [url="http://www.usga.org/workarea/linkit.aspx?linkidentifier=id&itemid=14253#Hazards"][i]hazard[/i][/url] or to do so would unduly delay play.

[Newby]

[quote name='BFid' timestamp='1287682575' post='2752835']
So, if you hit a ball and you're not sure if it's in the water, hit a provisional, and then you actually FIND your ball rolled in the water, a drop is not an option? But if you know it is in the water hazard you're allowed to drop? Doesn't make much sense to me.

I don't really see how this saves time, especially with the words "may play another ball provisionally". Should this read "must"?

Maybe it would save time on figuring out some of the lateral water hazard drop zones, but in a normal water hazard, having to take stroke and distance (no option to drop), seems silly. Possible i'm not understanding the reasoning behind the rule, though.
[/quote]

I think you are misreading the rule.

[OpusX20]

[quote name='Newby' timestamp='1287685339' post='2752909']
[quote name='HitEmTrue' timestamp='1287679666' post='2752756']
I wonder if it is against USGA rules to make such a local rule.
[/quote]

This is a Local Rule authorised by the R&A/USGA
Appendix I Part B 1

It should however only be used if the following applies:

Ball Played Provisionally Under Rule [url="http://www.usga.org/workarea/linkit.aspx?linkidentifier=id&itemid=14304#26-1"]26-1[/url]Permitting play of a ball provisionally under Rule [url="http://www.usga.org/workarea/linkit.aspx?linkidentifier=id&itemid=14304#26-1"]26-1[/url] for a ball that may be in a [url="http://www.usga.org/workarea/linkit.aspx?linkidentifier=id&itemid=14253#WaterHazard"][i]water hazard[/i][/url] (including a [url="http://www.usga.org/workarea/linkit.aspx?linkidentifier=id&itemid=14253#LateralWaterHazard"][i]lateral water hazard[/i][/url]) of such character that, if the original ball is not found, it is known or virtually certain that it is in the [url="http://www.usga.org/workarea/linkit.aspx?linkidentifier=id&itemid=14253#WaterHazard"][i]water hazard[/i][/url] and it would be impracticable to determine whether the ball is in the [url="http://www.usga.org/workarea/linkit.aspx?linkidentifier=id&itemid=14253#Hazards"][i]hazard[/i][/url] or to do so would unduly delay play.


[/quote]

Newby, do you think this situation qualifies for that exception? That local rule (as you know) is only permited if there are abnormal conditions that interfere with the proper playing of the game. IMO, speed of play is not sufficient enough reason to invoke this local rule. I know it's hard to tell without actually seeing the situation, but this doesn't really sound like abnormal conditions to me.

[luxman]

[quote name='Fore_Man' timestamp='1287685143' post='2752906']
Tell them to increase the increments of their tee times by 3 minutes or so. That way if and when this happens (which must be often if they put in a rule) there is enough breathing room between groups to play by the rules of golf.

My local course has a lot of water and does not have a quick pace of play usually. They moved out the tee times by 3 mins each. Resulting in less total # of golfers, but quicker rounds with less waiting. Sometimes the course needs to suck it up and do a little customer service instead of being greedy and trying to squeeze the most golfers as they can on the course on any given day.
[/quote]

Sounds good, but at $100 per foursome they aren't going to lose any tee times.

[paulyb]

How about something that is in the rules and make a drop area on the other side of said hazard. Can't find ball, proceed to the drop area.

The only thing is in principle, you did not negotiate the hazard however getting a drop on the other side will certainly attain the club's goal of speeding up play.

thoughts

[Newby]

[quote name='OpusX20' timestamp='1287685972' post='2752926']
Newby, do you think this situation qualifies for that exception? That local rule (as you know) is only permited if there are abnormal conditions that interfere with the proper playing of the game. IMO, speed of play is not sufficient enough reason to invoke this local rule. I know it's hard to tell without actually seeing the situation, but this doesn't really sound like abnormal conditions to me.
[/quote]

I really don't know without seeing it. Bt perhaps luxman can give us more details of the layout.

I have only seen in use twice and once I introduced it on a course for a competion I was officaiting at. The local Committee later adopted it pemanently.

I have never otherwise seen a situation which demands it. But I haven't seen most courses in the world never mind this country.

[hayzooos]

8 minutes between tee times should be the absolute minimum. 10 is probably best, but you can lose a few tee times per day, and at a busy course, that can really add up over the course of the year.

[Newby]

[quote name='paulyb' timestamp='1287688462' post='2752986']
How about something that is in the rules and make a drop area on the other side of said hazard. Can't find ball, proceed to the drop area.

The only thing is in principle, you did not negotiate the hazard however getting a drop on the other side will certainly attain the club's goal of speeding up play.

thoughts
[/quote]

That is certainly not in the rules. See 33-8/2

[url="http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Decision-33/#33-8/2"]Link to Decision[/url]

[Sawgrass]

[quote name='Newby' timestamp='1287689245' post='2753006']
[quote name='paulyb' timestamp='1287688462' post='2752986']
How about something that is in the rules and make a drop area on the other side of said hazard. Can't find ball, proceed to the drop area.

The only thing is in principle, you did not negotiate the hazard however getting a drop on the other side will certainly attain the club's goal of speeding up play.

thoughts
[/quote]

That is certainly not in the rules. See 33-8/2

[url="http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Decision-33/#33-8/2"]Link to Decision[/url]
[/quote]

It was my understanding that the prohibition of dropping on the green side of a water hazard as described in decision 33-8/2 was fundamentally based on it being a water hazard and not a lateral water hazard.

If the hazard is a lateral, I don't see why you can't make a drop zone on the green side of it. Whether this is correct or not, I've seen courses marked like this many times (Harbour Town #14 is marked this way -- at least when I've played it), and it does have the impact of speeding up play without making new rules up or applying local rules as paulyb suggests.

[Fore_Man]

[quote name='luxman' timestamp='1287688125' post='2752977']
[quote name='Fore_Man' timestamp='1287685143' post='2752906']
Tell them to increase the increments of their tee times by 3 minutes or so. That way if and when this happens (which must be often if they put in a rule) there is enough breathing room between groups to play by the rules of golf.

My local course has a lot of water and does not have a quick pace of play usually. They moved out the tee times by 3 mins each. Resulting in less total # of golfers, but quicker rounds with less waiting. Sometimes the course needs to suck it up and do a little customer service instead of being greedy and trying to squeeze the most golfers as they can on the course on any given day.
[/quote]

Sounds good, but at $100 per foursome they aren't going to lose any tee times.
[/quote]

More like $200 per foursome at my course for walkers. But anyways- tee times everywhere are pretty loose unless the course is full. And with the economy these days people are shying away from high priced rounds that are slow. Time and money are both a premium. Courses have to be competitive with their overall product. And I think that includes the pace, not just conditions and cost. Must my opinion...

As your course seems to be private, maybe they could adjust the tee times only on the weekends or during competitions.

[Newby]

[quote name='Sawgrass' timestamp='1287691342' post='2753065']
[quote name='Newby' timestamp='1287689245' post='2753006']
[quote name='paulyb' timestamp='1287688462' post='2752986']
How about something that is in the rules and make a drop area on the other side of said hazard. Can't find ball, proceed to the drop area.

The only thing is in principle, you did not negotiate the hazard however getting a drop on the other side will certainly attain the club's goal of speeding up play.

thoughts
[/quote]

That is certainly not in the rules. See 33-8/2

[url="http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Decision-33/#33-8/2"]Link to Decision[/url]
[/quote]

It was my understanding that the prohibition of dropping on the green side of a water hazard as described in decision 33-8/2 was fundamentally based on it being a water hazard and not a lateral water hazard.

If the hazard is a lateral, I don't see why you can't make a drop zone on the green side of it. Whether this is correct or not, I've seen courses marked like this many times (Harbour Town #14 is marked this way -- at least when I've played it), and it does have the impact of speeding up play without making new rules up or applying local rules as paulyb suggests.

[/quote]

PaulyB didn't say that he was talking about LWHs only.
The OP mentions all WHs.

[Newby]

[quote name='luxman' timestamp='1287676442' post='2752685']
New Local Rule
The following local rule will be in effect immediately:
"If there is doubt whether [color="#000000"]a [/color]ball is in or is lost in [color="#ff0000"][u][i][b]a [/b][/i][/u][/color]water hazard (including a lateral water hazard),
[/quote]

I have just noticed that your LR is written for all WHs on the course.
This would not be approved by the RBs.
The specimen LR says "If there is doubt whether [color="#000000"]a [/color]ball is in or is lost in [color="#ff0000"][u][i][b]the [/b][/i][/u][/color]water hazard (including a lateral water hazard) and is [b]specific[/b] to a nominated WH that satisfies the conditions in the Appendix,

[2bGood]

We are talking about this rule at our club too. We don't have a pace issue as a bad round is 4.5hours a good round is 3:45, but we have one par three hole that is yellowed staked with long water carry with high reeds on the other side of the water, the way the rules are you can't play a provisional it your think your ball may be on land, when it could be lost in the hazard (you can't see the 10 yards just past the water).By the rules, once you play a second ball from the tee, even if your first ball is found, you are have to play the second ball. So if you have a chance that you are not in the hazard it is best to walk up 150 yards and check, if you are in the hazard, you have to head back to hit a second ball.

What is proposed at our club and already in place in many clubs is local rule that allowes you to hit a provisional and if your first ball is found outside the hazard you have to play it, if it is in the hazard, you have the option of playing it or playing your provisional.

It seems like a good rule to me.

[Sawgrass]

[quote name='2bGood' timestamp='1287713494' post='2753604']
We are talking about this rule at our club too. We don't have a pace issue as a bad round is 4.5hours a good round is 3:45, but we have one par three hole that is yellowed staked with long water carry with high reeds on the other side of the water, the way the rules are you can't play a provisional it your think your ball may be on land, when it could be lost in the hazard (you can't see the 10 yards just past the water).By the rules, once you play a second ball from the tee, even if your first ball is found, you are have to play the second ball. So if you have a chance that you are not in the hazard it is best to walk up 150 yards and check, if you are in the hazard, you have to head back to hit a second ball.

What is proposed at our club and already in place in many clubs is local rule that allowes you to hit a provisional and if your first ball is found outside the hazard you have to play it, if it is in the hazard, [size="3"]you have the option of playing it or playing your provisional.

[/size]It seems like a good rule to me.
[/quote]

IMO it is never a good idea to allow you to choose to play a ball found in a hazard or select your provisional instead. Suppose your provisional was hit out of bounds, and then another provisional was hit? You'd be sure to play your ball in the hazard no matter the lie. It's just not balanced.

A better solution would be to grow the rough in that 10 yards past the hazard, to the extent that you might lose a ball in it. That way you could hit a provisional without a local rule based on your fear that the ball was lost outside the hazard. If you get up there and find it outside the hazard, no problem. If you don't, given the lack of virtual certainty that it's in the hazard, you presume it lost outside the hazard and play your provisional. If you find it in the hazard you either hit it, or take relief.

[bigmoneyp]

I don't like this rule. If you hit a provisional but its not a very good shot you get penalized. You would have to play this shot rather than being able to drop and hit from what could be a more desirable lie.

[grabthepin]

[quote name='Newby' timestamp='1287695939' post='2753181']
[quote name='Sawgrass' timestamp='1287691342' post='2753065']
[quote name='Newby' timestamp='1287689245' post='2753006']
[quote name='paulyb' timestamp='1287688462' post='2752986']
How about something that is in the rules and make a drop area on the other side of said hazard. Can't find ball, proceed to the drop area.

The only thing is in principle, you did not negotiate the hazard however getting a drop on the other side will certainly attain the club's goal of speeding up play.

thoughts
[/quote]

That is certainly not in the rules. See 33-8/2

[url="http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Decision-33/#33-8/2"]Link to Decision[/url]
[/quote]

It was my understanding that the prohibition of dropping on the green side of a water hazard as described in decision 33-8/2 was fundamentally based on it being a water hazard and not a lateral water hazard.

If the hazard is a lateral, I don't see why you can't make a drop zone on the green side of it. Whether this is correct or not, I've seen courses marked like this many times (Harbour Town #14 is marked this way -- at least when I've played it), and it does have the impact of speeding up play without making new rules up or applying local rules as paulyb suggests.

[/quote]

PaulyB didn't say that he was talking about LWHs only.
The OP mentions all WHs.
[/quote]

Even for LWHs like HT#14, it's a severe advantage to drop greenside if you chunk a shot into it from the tee.

[HitEmTrue]

Sawgrass, I agree with your assessment of the potential downsides to this kind of rule. The player can be left with choices that aren't in the spirit of rule 26...including not trying to see if the ball is in the hazard if the provisional is hit stiff or in the hole.

And I like your idea of rough on that specific par 3. The entire area wouldn't have to be rough, just enough of an area that the ball MIGHT be lost in it.


[quote name='bigmoneyp' timestamp='1287716230' post='2753691']
I don't like this rule. If you hit a provisional but its not a very good shot you get penalized. You would have to play this shot rather than being able to drop and hit from what could be a more desirable lie.
[/quote]

Under that rule, you CAN drop and hit the provisional from what could be a more desirable lie/location.

[_MS22_]

Why doesn't your club just do what mine and many others do by regulating tee times against slow members?

My club does everything digitally and you can check your times all of the time. Time when you tee off, time at the turn, time at completion of your round, either with guests or other members. If your times are not up to par, no pun intended, you have to bring them back down to acceptable levels before being given tee times during peak hours like Sat and Sun mornings from 730-noon, T-Th 330-500, Fri at noon, etc. We have members that average 5h40min rounds, and they can not tee off until after 1130am on Sat/Sun. Sure, rounds on a Tuesday at 5pm are not tracked since there is nobody at the turn so you can go play multiple balls when nobody is on the course but for times when the course is very busy you are being watched. All of your times are emailed to you and when your rounds surpass acceptable time limits you are given a warning in the mail and then any breach upon that restricts you from reserving prime tee times. The policy has actually helped more than people think it would.

And to answer the question many people ask after hearing the policy, if you are stuck behind a slow member/group as the policy was being instituted, say they were a hole and a half or two holes from the group in front of them their slow play did not effect the groups being held up, the effected groups times were simply discarded. In one year of this policy being applied and enforced the average round for a Sat/Sun morning time has dropped more than one whole hour! I want to say it was 72minutes to be exact. Yep, we lost a handful of members over the ordeal, but we gained just as many back from other clubs plagued by slow play.

[Sawgrass]

MS22, that plan sounds pretty darn good to me. If I'm not mistaken, it allows fast players to enjoy themselves, and slow players to enjoy themselves too -- just at a different time of day.

The fast play thing is important to some, and an annoyance to others. Maybe everybody wins at your place.

[grabthepin]

I think it's somewhat a win for the players, but it's not attacking the cause of slow play, just catering for it.

The only encouragement to pick up pace is to get into the morning times and many groups will just be happy to play slowly at a later tee time. So the club isn't pushing through more rounds in a day, just more in the morning, less in the afternoon.

Plus the people who can only play later because of their schedule are now stuck with the slow brigade.

There's a saying in golf that goes something like "slow golfers tend to befriend other slow golfers and create an even slower force" and I feel MS22's club is essentially forcing this friendship.

I do like however that some action is being taken towards the slower golfers.