OT - Reed, Again

[jeffwarne]

I thought players announced their ball and marking on the 1st tee?

This is not required at all under the Rules of Golf. Nor do you have to announce to the group when you're changing balls, markings, etc.

You only have to be able to identify your own golf ball.

On the first tee, the starter will commonly say "gentlemen, please identify your ball and markings" as he is reading the local rules etc.
It may not be a rule of golf, but I defy anyone to not hold up their ball and state the brand, number and markings after being asked to do so in front of the group.


And sure, I technically need merely to be able to identify my ball, but those not of the Reed ilk(as in nearly all), will announce the number and markings on a provisional, to distinguish it from the original.To keep that simple, most will stick with the same number they began with and declared on 1 tee, or, if switching numbers, let someone, preferably their marker, in the group know.




So you're both right-not a rule, but a custom.


I've gone so far as to use different color markers for a tournament round if I lost balls during the practice round.

[Anthony Butler]

As was shown on Golf Channel this morning, Reed's ball clearly entered a different tree than the one they were looking in... when Reed says he was "100% certain" he identified the ball he hit from the tee, he was clearly wrong and most likely lying.


He's taking advantage of the fact that most Tour rules officials will give professional golfers the benefit of the doubt. Reed has demonstrated that he will abuse that trust when given the opportunity.

[Steve Wilson]

2003 Dornoch Open on the fourth hole I pulled a second shot towards the gorse and saw it impact a bush.  I wasn't sure I could find it and so played a provisional.  I hit that one on damned near the same line but it came up a tad short.  When we got there the two balls were lying with a couple of feet of one another.  Identically marked balls with not obvious means of determing which was which. Under those circumstances I would have to have walked back to the location from which I hit the two shots and hit a third, correct? 


Fortunately, there was a scrape on one of the balls which to my satisfaction and that of my fellow competitor seemed to indicate that was the first ball which we agreed had struck the gorse.  I played it without penalty and we went on our merry way.  Since then it's occurred to me that it might be a wise thing to makr balls with different numbers of dots to differentiate them.  I don't usually, but what are the odds of that happening to me again.


Did I do the right thing or am I Patrick Reed on a small scale?

[Sean_A]

I thought players announced their ball and marking on the 1st tee?

This is not required at all under the Rules of Golf. Nor do you have to announce to the group when you're changing balls, markings, etc.

You only have to be able to identify your own golf ball.

On the first tee, the starter will commonly say "gentlemen, please identify your ball and markings" as he is reading the local rules etc.
It may not be a rule of golf, but I defy anyone to not hold up their ball and state the brand, number and markings after being asked to do so in front of the group.

And sure, I technically need merely to be able to identify my ball, but those not of the Reed ilk(as in nearly all), will announce the number and markings on a provisional, to distinguish it from the original.To keep that simple, most will stick with the same number they began with and declared on 1 tee, or, if switching numbers, let someone, preferably their marker, in the group know.

So you're both right-not a rule, but a custom.

I've gone so far as to use different color markers for a tournament round if I lost balls during the practice round.

Jeff

Do you think you could help corroborate the ball identity in this Reed case?

Ciao

[Tony_Muldoon]

2003 Dornoch Open on the fourth hole I pulled a second shot towards the gorse and saw it impact a bush.  I wasn't sure I could find it and so played a provisional.  I hit that one on damned near the same line but it came up a tad short.  When we got there the two balls were lying with a couple of feet of one another.  Identically marked balls with not obvious means of determing which was which. Under those circumstances I would have to have walked back to the location from which I hit the two shots and hit a third, correct? 


Fortunately, there was a scrape on one of the balls which to my satisfaction and that of my fellow competitor seemed to indicate that was the first ball which we agreed had struck the gorse.  I played it without penalty and we went on our merry way.  Since then it's occurred to me that it might be a wise thing to makr balls with different numbers of dots to differentiate them.  I don't usually, but what are the odds of that happening to me again.


Did I do the right thing or am I Patrick Reed on a small scale?

Give us another dozen episodes of dubious behaviour and I'll take your question seriously 

[Thomas Dai]

Usually a sleeve of three new balls will all be the same number, which is something of a pain from an intensification point of view (but likely easier for the manufacturers packaging process).
If you buy a dozen switch the different numbers around between the four sleeves.
And put your own mark on them too.
Atb

[Rob Marshall]

Who doesn't mark your ball?

[Pete_Pittock]

2003 Dornoch Open on the fourth hole I pulled a second shot towards the gorse and saw it impact a bush.  I wasn't sure I could find it and so played a provisional.  I hit that one on damned near the same line but it came up a tad short.  When we got there the two balls were lying with a couple of feet of one another.  Identically marked balls with not obvious means of determing which was which. Under those circumstances I would have to have walked back to the location from which I hit the two shots and hit a third, correct? 
Fortunately, there was a scrape on one of the balls which to my satisfaction and that of my fellow competitor seemed to indicate that was the first ball which we agreed had struck the gorse.  I played it without penalty and we went on our merry way.  Since then it's occurred to me that it might be a wise thing to makr balls with different numbers of dots to differentiate them.  I don't usually, but what are the odds of that happening to me again.
Did I do the right thing or am I Patrick Reed on a small scale?

Steve,
Current rules, you would choose which ball to continue play, but it would also then be your provisional ball. In your case, playing the 4th shot. Rules historians would have to ascertain what the rule said in 2003.
    My somewhat like situation, was in a club championship. On the first day pulled a drive, found what appeared to be my ball ion high rough, played it and continued on. On second day on that same hole and de-javued my drive into the same area. This time I found two identically marked balls, realized I had played a wrong ball the day before (after I searched my bag and found a ball with slightly different markings) and promptly DQ'd myself from the event.

[Tim Martin]

It’s a shame he is so exhausting because he’s a heck of a player.

[JohnVDB]

2003 Dornoch Open on the fourth hole I pulled a second shot towards the gorse and saw it impact a bush.  I wasn't sure I could find it and so played a provisional.  I hit that one on damned near the same line but it came up a tad short.  When we got there the two balls were lying with a couple of feet of one another.  Identically marked balls with not obvious means of determing which was which. Under those circumstances I would have to have walked back to the location from which I hit the two shots and hit a third, correct? 


Fortunately, there was a scrape on one of the balls which to my satisfaction and that of my fellow competitor seemed to indicate that was the first ball which we agreed had struck the gorse.  I played it without penalty and we went on our merry way.  Since then it's occurred to me that it might be a wise thing to makr balls with different numbers of dots to differentiate them.  I don't usually, but what are the odds of that happening to me again.


Did I do the right thing or am I Patrick Reed on a small scale?

You did the right thing.  Since they are both yours, if you are unable to tell which was which, you get to pick one to continue with as your provisional and your original is considered lost so you’d be hitting your fourth shot.

[JohnVDB]

Maybe he hit a ball in the 3rd tree during a practice round and that is what they found. Or maybe the rules official needs higher magnification binoculars.
Or maybe at this point you tell Reed to climb the tree and bring the ball down himself, anything short of that I'm going to presume you're lying.

At the US Public Links in Utah quite a few years go, Bryson DeChambeau hit his second shot on a par five into some bad country.  Getting there, he found a ball and could see his marking on it so he played it to the green.  When he got there he realized the number was incorrect and realized it was one he’d lost during his practice round,  he immediately called the penalty for playing a wrong ball and went back to searching for his original.  I don’t remember if he found it, but I’m pretty sure we could name one or more players who wouldn’t have done that.

[David_Tepper]

"Usually a sleeve of three new balls will all be the same number, which is something of a pain from an intensification point of view (but likely easier for the manufacturers packaging process). If you buy a dozen switch the different numbers around between the four sleeves. And put your own mark on them too."

Or, you could simply mark each ball with the same # in the sleeve a little differently. Why make things more complicated than they need to be?

[Peter Flory]

Maybe he hit a ball in the 3rd tree during a practice round and that is what they found. Or maybe the rules official needs higher magnification binoculars.
Or maybe at this point you tell Reed to climb the tree and bring the ball down himself, anything short of that I'm going to presume you're lying.

At the US Public Links in Utah quite a few years go, Bryson DeChambeau hit his second shot on a par five into some bad country.  Getting there, he found a ball and could see his marking on it so he played it to the green.  When he got there he realized the number was incorrect and realized it was one he’d lost during his practice round,  he immediately called the penalty for playing a wrong ball and went back to searching for his original.  I don’t remember if he found it, but I’m pretty sure we could name one or more players who wouldn’t have done that.

I had a very similar scenario, but it ended up being a ball from the group behind on a hole with a blind drive down a hill (7th at the University of Michigan course).  i.e. I was looking for a lost ball in the tree line and then someone pointed out a ball in the fairway and that it probably bounced back in play.  It was the same make and number and had what I thought was my marking on it.  I hit the shot and then when I got to the green, I saw that it had someone else's initials on the side of it. 

[Steve Wilson]

Upon reflection, I have determined that it was the Burghfield House competition which was held the previous day to the Dornoch Open in 2003.  So, Tony, I guess in misstating the competition I have added one to my count of dubious conduct and so am now limited to a mere 11.


Re: the Patrick Reed controversy.


Wasn't there a similar situation with Gary Player in one of his Opens Championships.  On the final day he hit his approach into tall rough on one of the later holes.   A ball with the appropriate markings was found, but it turned out he had hit a ball into the same area during one of the practice rounds?  He won by four so it didn't matter, but he was suspected, by some, of sharp practice?  I'm thinking it came up on this discussion board many years ago.

[John Kavanaugh]

Unliked champions are most likely cheaters. Says the losers.

[JohnVDB]

Here is another interesting one we had a few years ago.


College event, day 1 shotgun start at Poppy Hills.


Player starts on the 5th hole and hooks into the woods between 4 and 5. He gets there and finds a ball with his school logo on it.  Players on 4 (par 5 going opposite direction) aren’t in range yet so he figures it is his.  Plays out and to the green where he holes out.  He tees off with the ball on par 3 6th. When he lifts it, he sees it doesn’t have his mark on it, but it is the number ball he started the round with. He recognizes mark is from a teammate who had started on 2.


We meet with him and he is quite sure there is no way he’d have one of his teammates balls in his bag, but we are trying to not DQ him so we figure we need to find out if there is any way that ball could have gotten there.  We go to the player whose mark is on the ball to find out.  Unfortunately he told us he lost a ball between 4 & 5 during the practice round the day before.


We had to DQ the kid who had properly self-reported something he could have gotten away with.

[John Kavanaugh]

John,


What did it cost his team?

[John Kavanaugh]

I’m thinking the golfer who started on 2 also hit the wrong ball. He took the low road for the team. Who would you hire?

[A.G._Crockett]

"Usually a sleeve of three new balls will all be the same number, which is something of a pain from an intensification point of view (but likely easier for the manufacturers packaging process). If you buy a dozen switch the different numbers around between the four sleeves. And put your own mark on them too."

Or, you could simply mark each ball with the same # in the sleeve a little differently. Why make things more complicated than they need to be?

Three simple answers to this:


1. Mark balls a dozen at a time, and never put three new ones of the same number in your bag at the AP same time. (Note: If you don’t know what the number was on the first ball, that’s a different problem.)


2. Depending on what color ball you are playing, have a ball(s) in your bag of a different color to use as provisionals. 


3. Have a Callaway Tru-vis soccer ball in your bag to use as a provisional. 


2 and 3 don’t work if the one-ball “rule” is in effect, but since it rarely is, most of us will be ok.

[Anthony Butler]

Unliked champions are most likely cheaters. Says the losers.

Who says that without any evidence to back up their claim?


Player's situation indicates there is some doubt as to whether he played the right ball. Based on the video shown on Golf Channel, there is almost zero chance Reed identified the correct ball in the tree... mostly because he was looking in the wrong tree. If that ball performed some kind JFK Magic Bullet act after hitting the first tree you would have seen some evidence of that in the video.

McIlroy ended up as the champion, not Reed. This situation would be a bigger deal if Reed had won.

[Mark Pearce]

I’m thinking the golfer who started on 2 also hit the wrong ball. He took the low road for the team. Who would you hire?

In a practice round.  Is there a penalty for hitting the wrong ball in practice?

[John Kavanaugh]

Unliked champions are most likely cheaters. Says the losers.

Who says that without any evidence to back up their claim?


Player's situation indicates there is some doubt as to whether he played the right ball. Based on the video shown on Golf Channel, there is almost zero chance Reed identified the correct ball in the tree... mostly because he was looking in the wrong tree. If that ball performed some kind JFK Magic Bullet act after hitting the first tree you would have seen some evidence of that in the video.

McIlroy ended up as the champion, not Reed. This situation would be a bigger deal if Reed had won.

I’m saying that everyone who wins a member/guest is called a cheater. If the guys are unpopular all doubt is erased.

[Tony_Muldoon]

McIlroy ended up as the champion, not Reed. This situation would be a bigger deal if Reed had won.

Reed did win, 910799Euro's nearly 400k more than Lucas Herbert in third and so on down the line. 

Why would it be a bigger deal if Rory had choked?


Not that I think anyone is giving him credence but: I've stood under Palm trees (and I've sold hundreds) and when something, e.g. something small and white gets lodged where the frond joins the trunk then there's no way it's visible to someone standing underneath it. That much must have been apparent to the referee. At the same time other people were saying you're looking up the wrong tree.  But apparently it's all OK if the player says he can see it clearly enough to identify it.

[Anthony Butler]

Unliked champions are most likely cheaters. Says the losers.

Who says that without any evidence to back up their claim?


Player's situation indicates there is some doubt as to whether he played the right ball. Based on the video shown on Golf Channel, there is almost zero chance Reed identified the correct ball in the tree... mostly because he was looking in the wrong tree. If that ball performed some kind JFK Magic Bullet act after hitting the first tree you would have seen some evidence of that in the video.

McIlroy ended up as the champion, not Reed. This situation would be a bigger deal if Reed had won.

I’m saying that everyone who wins a member/guest is called a cheater. If the guys are unpopular all doubt is erased.

I have to admit the scores in a scramble where everyone in the group is on the same team sometimes give me pause. Over the summer, we shot a 60 from the back tees at a Donald Ross course here in MA that carries a 74.0/136 from the back tees and didn't even sniff the prizes... I'm also positive we breached a couple of rules in doing so.. 

[Anthony Butler]

McIlroy ended up as the champion, not Reed. This situation would be a bigger deal if Reed had won.

Reed did win, 910799Euro's nearly 400k more than Lucas Herbert in third and so on down the line. 

Why would it be a bigger deal if Rory had choked?


Not that I think anyone is giving him credence but: I've stood under Palm trees (and I've sold hundreds) and when something, e.g. something small and white gets lodged where the frond joins the trunk then there's no way it's visible to someone standing underneath it. That much must have been apparent to the referee. At the same time other people were saying you're looking up the wrong tree.  But apparently it's all OK if the player says he can see it clearly enough to identify it.

He was richly rewarded.. but did not win. There can only be one winner - for a golf tournament at least.

Reed's ability to manipulate rules officials must be respected... if not admired.