[THuckaby2]

But Adam, that's assumed.  The question is moving a ball from in the water, within one club-length, to a playable spot on dry land within the hazard.  By technical rules of "drop within one club length, don't improve condition", this would be allowable, since they are not moving it out of the hazard.

It's just so damn WRONG though, since it takes it from unplayable to playable, that we have to think of something to disallow this.

One way would be to change the one club-length criterion to something smaller.  But even then, a situation like this might be possible... Even a scorecard-length could get one out of the water and onto some mud or something....

My take would be this:  add a special rule for scrambles that all balls in hazards must be played as they lie if they are to be played, no movement allowed.  That is, you hit the first ball, then place the remainder exactly where the last one was.  You know, kinda like what one does when trying to identify a ball, or after marking it when it's not on the green, in real golf?

But of course Mike B. is right.  So few golfers follow the rules anyway in regular golf, it does seem folly to try to legislate scrambles, where goofiness prevails.  Still, for a member-guest or something where scramble might be one of several formats played over several days (as it often is), it would be nice to get some codified rules.  And I'd start with this one.

TH

[mike_malone]

Some nice person has just emailed me the section of the Buick rules book;however it seems to allow placing it on the ground.That poor guy might get drawn into something big.

[THuckaby2]

Buick tourney is a bunch of wussies.  

Seriously, by the letter of the law, shivas did have it right - you really are not improving "condition" as you are staying in the hazard, so it would seem to be allowable if that is the rule (which I believe is the case in the Buick thing).

What I'm saying, Mike is GO BEYOND THIS.  Create some real rules to make this closer to real golf and farther from legalized cheating.

What I suggested a few posts ago would accomplish this.

But then again, you'd have to decide how serious your event is and how much of a hardass you want to be.  If the answer to either of those is "not much", then go with what Buick says!

TH

[mike_malone]

Tom
   I saw our pro last night;I think he will allow only "card-length" movement;that shold solve alot of abuse.

[THuckaby2]

Mike, I'd say that is a much better way to do it for a serious event.

And even in the water situation, well... if they are a card-length from dry land, then I'd have to believe they could play it out of the water anyway, so this even fits my "feeling right about it" issue.  You're just saving them the dry-cleaning bills, hopefully!

TH

[Dan Herrmann]

Tom
   I saw our pro last night;I think he will allow only "card-length" movement;that shold solve alot of abuse.

Kinda like the measurement for a styme!

[JohnV]

I my opinion, in a scramble, the original ball should always be played as it lies.  After that Rule 20-3 applies.  Basically, if the lie has not been altered, the next ball should be put in the same place.  If the lie has been altered (divot or whatever), Rule 20-3b should apply.  It says that through the green, you place it within one club length in the nearest lie most similar to the original lie, in a water hazard, do the same thing except that the ball must be in placed in the hazard, and in a bunker, recreate the original lie as nearly as possible.

Of course, nobody plays it that way so what difference does it matter what I think.

[THuckaby2]

JV:

Here's a rare situation where I want to be MORE STRICT than the rules themselves.  I never thought I'd see the day... But in Mike's water hazard scenario, if we follow the rules you state, the result is one guy takes a whack at it in the water (the very definition of taking one for the team, as he gets splattered), then they decree the lie to be changed, as he likely gouged out a bunch of mud, so they drop within one club-length - on the bank - thereby extricating themselves from the unplayable water and into a playable situation, for the next three attempts.

Which again, just seems wrong to me.

Thus I like the one-card-length option, or the everything in the hazard is unplayable idea I said.   Something is just bugging me about taking a ball out of water into a playable place.

Maybe it's menopause.  

[mike_malone]

We haven't even talked about guys getting one of those long putters for measurement.

[A.G._Crockett]

JohnV,
Actually, in a fairly large HS tournament here last spring, we sorta, kinda played it that way.  In a two-man scramble format, the rule was that if a shot was played from a hazard, the original ball had to be played as it lay.  The second ball could then be placed within a scorecard's length.  That way, there at least some penalty for playing from the hazard.

(If you're wondering why in the heck we were playing a scramble format in the first place, it was just a way to try to get in 18 holes before dark in the early spring.  Somewhat quicker than a four-ball or stroke play format.)

[mike_malone]

This can get crazy-but in the last example,can one choose who tries to hit the ball out of the water-so, maybe the lesser player hits first,then the better player hits from the better lie.

[THuckaby2]

Mike:

Damn right.  That's how I'd do it, in this scenario.  But remember the splash factor... you'd have to make sure said lesser player was willing to take one for the team.

 

It also is among the reasons this still seems wrong to me.  But hell, it's a pretty unlikely occurrence, so I guess the greater good here prevails so I shall cease to be such a hardass.  That is, it does seem too harsh to disallow all shots from hazards, so this is the best we can do.

TH

[A.G._Crockett]

For clarification purposes, the player whose ball was being played from the hazard had to play that shot as it lay.

[THuckaby2]

AGC:  aha!  That is a good addition to this.  Then there's no guilt or peer presssure.

 

2-man scrambles are VERY fun, btw.  Tougher to score than it might otherwise sound, also... I have made lots of bogeys in that, sadly.  I can't ever remember making a bogey in a 4-man scramble.

TH

[JohnV]

JV:

then they decree the lie to be changed, as he likely gouged out a bunch of mud, so they drop within one club-length - on the bank - thereby extricating themselves from the unplayable water and into a playable situation, for the next three attempts.

Not drop, PLACE in the most similar lie within one club length.  IF the ball was 1/2 under water, the second one had better be placed 1/2 under water.

[THuckaby2]

That's why I fail rules quizzes.  I mean place when I say drop.  

But still, if you can go within one club length and still be in the hazard, you can go from under water to on a bank, right?  Or is the "similar lie" part of that somehow requiring that you stay underwater?

If the answer to the last question is yes, then voila, we have our perfect way to do this.  If it's no, then Houston, we still have a problem.

TH

[JohnV]

Yes, "most similar lie" is the key there.   Unless the first player knocked all the water out of the hazard, the second ball should be in a similar lie in the water.

A perfect example of this in non-scramble play is when a competitor plays a wrong ball and the player whose ball it was must play from the same place.  If the competitor took a divot that couldn't be replaced, the other player must find the most similar lie within a club length.  That means that if the ball was in deep rough, the other guy must place his ball in similar deep rough, not out in the first cut that just might be within a club length.  Also, if the ball was covered by grass or leaves, the other ball must be similarly covered.

[THuckaby2]

JV - thank you very much.  You, the truth, and the rules have set me free.  That is the best way to do this without a doubt.
Then add in what AGC said, that the player who's ball it is has to hit it first, and all issues are answered.

 

[THuckaby2]

Dave - you need to read the entire thread.  The truth has set me free.

 

But to answer your question, that's not the scenario I find wrong.  Taking a ball from completely underwater and unplayable to a lie on the bank within a club-length, that I find wrong.

And JV's truth wouldn't allow that, so hallelujah!

TH

[JohnV]

Just remember that my suggestion is merely that.  I've never heard of a scramble that was played that way.  Of course, most scrambles are played for fun, not golf.  Fun and golf being mutually exclusive when your game is as bad as mine has been lately.

[THuckaby2]

JV:

I know.  And yes, these rules would most properly apply ONLY at "serious" competitions where scramble might be played, like the member-member or member guest, where it's one of several formats played over several days.  No way this works for the average charity screw-around event.

And be patient, my friend, the fun shall return.  The golf gods never keep us away permanently.

 

[mike_malone]

 Isn't life funny? I hit my tee shot into the hazard in the two-man scramble;we chose my partner's shot that was in the trees.

[A_Clay_Man]

JohnV- Is everything o.k. at home?

Don't get too bummed, whenever my game leaves me, I don't take it too hard because, I never knew why it showed-up in the first place.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()