Out of bounds stakes /rules question

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Sure, a hazard and OOB are different, but does that mean the demarcation line can't be treated the same in either case?  Why not keep the rules consistent and therefore easier to remember?

They are consistent. If any of the ball is in, it’s in. In bounds or in the penalty area.

There are even rules or an “order” applying to a ball that’s in a bunker and a penalty area simultaneously. See 2.2c:


c. Determining Area of Course Where Ball Lies
The area of the course where a player’s ball lies affects the Rules that apply in playing the ball or taking relief.
A ball is always treated as lying in only one area of the course:
   •   If part of the ball is in both the general area and one of the four specific areas of the course, it is treated as lying in that specific area of the course.
   •   If part of the ball is in two specific areas of the course, it is treated as lying in the specific area that comes first in this order: penalty area, bunker, putting green.

[John_Cullum]

Wow, I never knew two stakes together indicated the end of OOB!

Two stakes together or "tied off" (the proper term) do not indicate the end of OB. It indicates that OB continues in the direction of the two stakes for an infinite distance.

[Peter Flory]

This is probably a good thing for me, but I've never noticed a double OB stake before.  Learned something new. 

[Sean_A]

This is probably a good thing for me, but I've never noticed a double OB stake before.  Learned something new.

+1...and, that's a tough call deciding OOB 200 down the line of play!

Ciao

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Two stakes together or "tied off" (the proper term) do not indicate the end of OB. It indicates that OB continues in the direction of the two stakes for an infinite distance.

Yes, that is here:
https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/committee-procedures/rule-2.html

If the internal boundary is not connected to other boundaries on the course it is important to mark where the boundary starts and finishes. It is recommended that two stakes be placed side-by-side and at an angle that indicates that the boundary extends indefinitely in the direction desired.

[Jon Wiggett]

Wow, I never knew two stakes together indicated the end of OOB!

Why wouldn't the line be treated the same in either case?

Ciao

Because OOB and hazards are fundamentally different Sean though you would be correct that it could be done in certain situations.

Sure, a hazard and OOB are different, but does that mean the demarcation line can't be treated the same in either case?  Why not keep the rules consistent and therefore easier to remember?

Ciao

Sean,


I agree completely. Anything that simplifies the rules has to be a good thing.

[mike_beene]

We have an internal out of bounds that ends with two stakes. In 25 years I have not seen anyone near the two stakes but I have assumed the OB line ended and it seems I was wrong. Evidently a girl playing in an SMU qualifier thought she was OB on 10 and replayed missing by a stroke. The stakes have no application to 10. We should pull them but easy pickings for a plaintiff lawyer if someone got hit.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I agree completely. Anything that simplifies the rules has to be a good thing.

Oh boy. No.


They are already about as simple and consistent s they can be for almost completely different things, IMO.

[Jerry Kluger]

Most courses do not have lines painted between either white or red stakes. So with regard to red stakes defining what is a lateral water hazard when you have a situation where the water hazard curves back and forth you need to have a local rule stating that the edge of the water is the hazard line otherwise you could have a situation where a ball is resting well outside the hazard but because of the curve of the water hazard it is within the hazard if you are looking at a line between the stakes.  I think the lack of a red line can also be a problem where there is a steep slope to the bank above the hazard where a tee shot would have gone in and not only do you get penalized for going in the hazard but you are penalized with a severe slope where you cannot advance the ball very far. 

[Jon Wiggett]

I agree completely. Anything that simplifies the rules has to be a good thing.

Oh boy. No.


They are already about as simple and consistent s they can be for almost completely different things, IMO.

Erik,


can you explain what the point of your post was.

[Thomas Dai]

I seem to recall that in the past trees or fence posts would sometimes have a white ring painted around them to signify OOB. Don’t see this much these days.
Atb

[Erik J. Barzeski]

can you explain what the point of your post was.

To express my disagreement with “Anything that simplifies the rules has to be a good thing.”