Jump to content


 

Photo

Ball Not Lost In Hazard


  • Please log in to reply
77 replies to this topic

#31 pom

pom

    Old Grouch.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 11905 posts
  • Locationtownsville

Posted 11 December 2017 - 02:38 PM

She was wrong on both counts. You could have  played a provisional as the ball could have been lost outside the hazard. You could not be sure about that until you actually arrived at the area where you thought the ball finished.

 Then when you could not find the ball the correct decision was to go back to the tee because the ball was lost & you did not play a provisional.

  One  thing i do not understand, if a ball deflects off something and you do not see where it goes how can you claim that the ball entered the hazard and " how do you decide where point of entry into the hazard was.


Member of the Vision Test Pilot Project.
No VTPP11

#32 rogolf

rogolf

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 469 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 03:47 PM

She was wrong on both counts. You could have  played a provisional as the ball could have been lost outside the hazard. You could not be sure about that until you actually arrived at the area where you thought the ball finished.

 Then when you could not find the ball the correct decision was to go back to the tee because the ball was lost & you did not play a provisional.

  One  thing i do not understand, if a ball deflects off something and you do not see where it goes how can you claim that the ball entered the hazard and " how do you decide where point of entry into the hazard was.

My experience is that "known virtually certain" is a tougher call for referees than it is for players, maybe because players don't know the requirements.  Players are much more likely to "go along" rather than create an issue, permitting a fellow-competitor to proceed under 26-1 when it should really be a lost ball situation.

Certainly the fellow-competitor in the original post was incorrect.  Maybe she misunderstood the guidance from the instructor?


  • OldBogey and languid like this

#33 OldBogey

OldBogey

    Defining and analysing humour is a pastime of humourless people

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24172 posts
  • LocationRegional Victoria

Posted 11 December 2017 - 04:47 PM

You don't have to have 'virtual certainty' that the ball is in a WH in order to take a provisional.
The only requirement is that the ball may be lot outside a WH or may be OOB.
You make that judgement on the tee.
 
When you get to the area the ball is estimated to be, the terrain and vegetation may well determine that your judgement was wrong. You then have to know or be virtual certain that the ball is not in the WH in order to continue with the provisional.

  

I don't consider a player playing a provisional ball in my deliberations about known or virtually certain that a ball that is not found is in a water hazard.  I may ask him why he hit a provisional and if he responds that he thought his ball may be lost outside it, then the provisional was permitted.  Now to decide on known or virtually certain that the original ball is in the water hazard.  KVC is a very high standard, 98+% probability.


You've got that backwards, AAA. You only have to suspect (2% suggested) that your ball may not be in the hazard but is lost, for the provisional to become the ball in play.

Golflink

Olinda Golf Club

Warragul Country Club

People say that nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.


#34 OldBogey

OldBogey

    Defining and analysing humour is a pastime of humourless people

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24172 posts
  • LocationRegional Victoria

Posted 11 December 2017 - 04:52 PM

Take a practical example.
 
From the tee you have to drive over a rise, behind which, is a ditch at or about your driving distance. You don't know the nature of the ground surrounding the ditch but last time you played there it was long grass beyond and in front of the WH.
You hit the ball straight down the fairway but slightly miscue. You reckon your ball could well be in the long grass short of the WH so declare a provisional as per rule 27-2.
 
When you get over the rise you see that all the long grass has been mown down to fairway length.
You and your group approach the WH and look all around. There is no sign of the ball on the fairway before or beyond the WH and it is so wide, there is nowhere it can be hiding in the light rough to the distant sides.
You can now claim to have KVC that it is in the WH.

I would agree that in a circumstance such as that, one could reassess their previous suspicion of a lost ball, then proceed as per ball in the hazard.

Golflink

Olinda Golf Club

Warragul Country Club

People say that nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.


#35 AAA

AAA

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3083 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 07:53 PM

  
You've got that backwards, AAA. You only have to suspect (2% suggested) that your ball may not be in the hazard but is lost, for the provisional to become the ball in play.

Sorry, I got my  'certain' and 'not' in knots.

 

If you then know or are virtually certain that the ball is in the WH you abandon the provisional.



#36 Can Break 80

Can Break 80

    metronome

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9127 posts

Posted 12 December 2017 - 05:46 AM

Can someone please explain the difference between a lateral water hazard and a water hazard, as I understand the procedure for the dropping ball and taking relief from the hazard are different.


2017 OOM winner at Growling Frog.

2016 A grade winner Moonah legends OOM4.

2015 member of team Vision winners of SGC pennant.

2014 National ISG champion

2014 winner Kooindah waters

2014 winner Magenta shores


2014 first ever hole in 1 in an ISG event, 4th Hole Kooindah waters 19th October

2012 winner of BHIC and gaining a 5 year exemption


#37 rogolf

rogolf

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 469 posts

Posted 12 December 2017 - 06:13 AM

Can someone please explain the difference between a lateral water hazard and a water hazard, as I understand the procedure for the dropping ball and taking relief from the hazard are different.

Rule 26-1 is shown below. 

For a water hazard, only options a. and b. are available

For a lateral water hazard, options a., b. and c. (both i and ii) are available.

 

26-1. Relief for Ball in Water Hazard

It is a question of fact whether a ball that has not been found after having been struck toward a water hazard is in the hazard. In the absence of knowledge or virtual certainty that a ball struck toward a water hazard, but not found, is in the hazard, the player must proceed under Rule 27-1.

If a ball is found in a water hazard or if it is known or virtually certain that a ball that has not been found is in the water hazard (whether the ball lies in water or not), the player may under penalty of one stroke:

a.  Proceed under the stroke and distance provision of Rule 27-1 by playing a ball as nearly as possible at the spot from which the original ball was last played (see Rule 20-5); or

b.  Drop a ball behind the water hazard, keeping the point at which the original ball last crossed the margin of the water hazard directly between the hole and the spot on which the ball is dropped, with no limit to how far behind the water hazard the ball may be dropped; or

c.  As additional options available only if the ball last crossed the margin of a lateral water hazard, drop a ball outside the water hazard within two club-lengths of and not nearer the hole than (i) the point where the original ball last crossed the margin of the water hazard or (ii) a point on the opposite margin of the water hazard equidistant from the hole.



#38 AAA

AAA

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3083 posts

Posted 12 December 2017 - 09:03 AM

Can someone please explain the difference between a lateral water hazard and a water hazard, as I understand the procedure for the dropping ball and taking relief from the hazard are different.

 

A "water hazard" is any sea, lake, pond, river, ditch, surface drainage ditch or other open water course (whether or not containing water) and anything of a similar nature on the course

 

A "lateral water hazard" is a water hazard or that part of a water hazard so situated that it is not possible, or is deemed by the Committee to be impracticable, to drop a ball behind the water hazard in accordance with Rule 26-Ib


Edited by AAA, 12 December 2017 - 09:06 AM.

  • BarnEsy05 likes this

#39 BarnEsy05

BarnEsy05

    Holing It Out

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31816 posts
  • LocationChopperville

Posted 12 December 2017 - 09:54 AM

Many moons ago there were different Coloured pegs for Hazards, Red for your Lateral and Yellow for water hazard...or vice versa, been so long I can’t remember, only ever see red markers thes days.

A

 

DON'T LET THE BLACK DOG WIN...

 

HELP IS OUT THERE

 
 
5 Time ISG NSW WBT Winner

2013 ISG NSW WBT COC Runner Up

2015 ISG NSW WBT COC

2nd ISG NSW Life Member Inductee...Got Had a Jacket to Prove It

2012 ISG National Championships...Inaugural Supreme Putting Champion

2013 ISG National Championships...3rd Place 2nd Round - Moonah Links

2013 ISG National Championships...13th place...now that's desperately unlucky

2014 ISG National Championships...13th place...no other golfer could be that desperately unlucky 2 years in a row!

2015 ISG National Championships...21st place...that's farked

2016 ISG National Championships...waaaaay down the list.

2016 ISG National Championships...2nd place Yarra Yarra Satellite Game 

2016 ISG National Championships...2nd place Huntingdale Satellite Game

2016 ISG National Championships...Captain of winning NSW Team, SOO

2017 ISG National Championships...12th place...heading in the right direction

2017 ISG National Championships...Winner The Lakes Satellite Game 43pts

2013 Brass Yacht Winner (Inaugural)

2014 Brass Yacht Winner

2015 Brass Yacht Runner-up

2016 Brass Yacht Winner

2017 Brass Yacht Winner

 

 

HOLE IN ONE

2017 ISG NATIONALS ROUND 2 RIVERSIDE OAKS 17TH HOLE BUNGOOL COURSE FIRST SHOT OF THE DAY (SHOTGUN START)

 

Life Motto: "If it's free, it's for me!"

 

 

 

 

Team Live4BarnEsy...forever undefeated angel-2-smiley-emoticon.gif

 
Desperately Unlucky ©


#40 Deege

Deege

    Really nice person

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4565 posts
  • LocationMelbourne

Posted 12 December 2017 - 04:22 PM

My experience is that "known virtually certain" is a tougher call for referees than it is for players, maybe because players don't know the requirements.  Players are much more likely to "go along" rather than create an issue, permitting a fellow-competitor to proceed under 26-1 when it should really be a lost ball situation.

Certainly the fellow-competitor in the original post was incorrect.  Maybe she misunderstood the guidance from the instructor?

 

Either it was misunderstood or incorrectly given. 

 

I think it is true that we "go along", but I don't really take that as a problem necessarily.

 

In practical terms for ordinary rounds we take the view that people aren't playing for sheep-stations and try to come up with the best understanding of the correct procedure without unduly delaying play by pulling out rule books and having an argument about it.  If it were the club championships or something, we normally have a referee available, and if we didn't we would do what I have done before and play a second ball and figure out the correct ruling afterwards.

 

Now I normally go away and find out what the correct ruling should have been later and try to communicate it to the people involved, but there is a disincentive to do that if you consider that finding out that you have made a mistake in a ruling on course could lead to you reaching the view that you have signed for an incorrect score.


Golflink

 

Winner C Grade Long Drive 2013 OOM #2 Heidelberg

Winner B Grade Long Drive 2015 OOM #4 Heritage

Winner B Grade NTP 2015 OOM #4 Heritage

 

Handicap PB - 12.6, baby


#41 Deege

Deege

    Really nice person

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4565 posts
  • LocationMelbourne

Posted 12 December 2017 - 04:29 PM

  One  thing i do not understand, if a ball deflects off something and you do not see where it goes how can you claim that the ball entered the hazard and " how do you decide where point of entry into the hazard was.

 

Poor explanation on my part.  The hazard in question is a creek which crosses about 20 metres in front of the green and then goes alongside the right hand side of the hole about 10 metres from the green.  So it is an L shape.  If your ball ends up in the right hand side part of the L, then it will actually have entered the hazard in the "front" part of the L.

 

In this case, it was clear where the ball entered the hazard, as it had a straight path across the hazard margin and travelled for another 10-15 metres inside the hazard until it hit the branch/trunk of a tree which was growing inside the hazard, after which it normally would be expected to drop down into the hazard, but in this case I didn't see where it deflected.


Golflink

 

Winner C Grade Long Drive 2013 OOM #2 Heidelberg

Winner B Grade Long Drive 2015 OOM #4 Heritage

Winner B Grade NTP 2015 OOM #4 Heritage

 

Handicap PB - 12.6, baby


#42 pom

pom

    Old Grouch.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 11905 posts
  • Locationtownsville

Posted 12 December 2017 - 08:01 PM

Poor explanation on my part.  The hazard in question is a creek which crosses about 20 metres in front of the green and then goes alongside the right hand side of the hole about 10 metres from the green.  So it is an L shape.  If your ball ends up in the right hand side part of the L, then it will actually have entered the hazard in the "front" part of the L.

 

In this case, it was clear where the ball entered the hazard, as it had a straight path across the hazard margin and travelled for another 10-15 metres inside the hazard until it hit the branch/trunk of a tree which was growing inside the hazard, after which it normally would be expected to drop down into the hazard, but in this case I didn't see where it deflected.

That comment was not aimed at you. Your situation just illustrates how easy it is to make an incorrect call. Because the tree was in the hazard you would have known point of entry. ( Unfortunately what you did not know was point of exit. :P).


  • Deege likes this
Member of the Vision Test Pilot Project.
No VTPP11

#43 OldBogey

OldBogey

    Defining and analysing humour is a pastime of humourless people

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24172 posts
  • LocationRegional Victoria

Posted 12 December 2017 - 10:18 PM

I have a query based on this. I know it has been discussed in here (rules forum) but I cannot recall the answer.
Scenario: tree growing in a water hazard, branches extend outside the hazard. A ball strikes branches of that tree and directly below that point is not in the hazard. Ball cannot be found. Q: Was the ball last seen in the hazard?

From memory (not always reliable), things growing in the hazard are part of the hazard, hence the ball which may have remained in the tree, was in the hazard.

Unless the ball was seen to deflect away from the hazard, one could be virtually certain that the ball is in the WH.

Golflink

Olinda Golf Club

Warragul Country Club

People say that nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.


#44 rogolf

rogolf

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 469 posts

Posted 13 December 2017 - 01:18 AM

I have a query based on this. I know it has been discussed in here (rules forum) but I cannot recall the answer.
Scenario: tree growing in a water hazard, branches extend outside the hazard. A ball strikes branches of that tree and directly below that point is not in the hazard. Ball cannot be found. Q: Was the ball last seen in the hazard?

From memory (not always reliable), things growing in the hazard are part of the hazard, hence the ball which may have remained in the tree, was in the hazard.

Unless the ball was seen to deflect away from the hazard, one could be virtually certain that the ball is in the WH.

Your memory is unreliable as you've suggested.

 

The margins of water hazards (includes lateral water hazards) extend vertically upwards and downwards.

The margin of ground under repair only extend downwards.  Things growing in ground under repair are part of the ground under repair, so branches of a tree rooted in ground under repair are part of the ground under repair even if they extend beyond the margin.

Because the margin of water hazards extend vertically downwards and upwards, branches of a tree rooted in the water hazard that are beyond the margin of the water hazard are not part of the water hazard.

It's all covered in the Definitions.



#45 OldBogey

OldBogey

    Defining and analysing humour is a pastime of humourless people

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24172 posts
  • LocationRegional Victoria

Posted 13 December 2017 - 12:35 PM

Thanks rogolf.
I was quite correct - that my memory is fallible.

One would logically think that the same principles would apply. But this is golf so, no, they don't.

Golflink

Olinda Golf Club

Warragul Country Club

People say that nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users