Close mown?

[rosecott]

Right in the middle of one of our fairways runs a fairly shallow channel - the end result, some years ago, of heavy machinery in use when major changes were being made. This week - probably due to inattention by one of our greenkeepers - the grass in this channel was not close mown but the same height as our first cut, 1.5 to 2 inches in height. This has always been cut to fairway height, the same as the rest of the fairway.

Question: should a player be able to Pick and Place as the area is clearly meant to be close mown?

 

[rulie]

Imo, yes. It is in a closely-mown area.

 

[Colin L]

I would go with that. It sounds as if you are talking of a depression which the mower, set to the right height for the fairway, has passed over.

 

[backwoodsman]

Hmm. Interesting. Even though I am loathe to disagree with an opinion from Colin, l think I'd tend to go the other way and say no (although I'm not going to stake my pension on it)

From Rosecott's narrative, it seems it is normally close mown. Meaning it is not an issue that the mowers can't deal with - ie the mowers can normally cut it to fairway height. And usually it is, so players usually get pick & place relief.

But the rules tend to deal with fact - eg is that ball in bounds or not? Yes/No. In this case the question is, is it cut to faiway height? Factual answer - no, at the moment, it's not. (Should it be cut to fairway height is a different question). Ergo, l opine you have to take the fact at base value, and say its not fairway height and play ball as it lies until such time as grass is cut properly. And give the relevant greenkeeper a boot up the nethers, or otherwise find out if there is a reason why it is not now being cut to fairway height.

I now stand back and await to be shot down in flames.

 

[Imurg]

Hmm. Interesting. Even though I am loathe to disagree with an opinion from Colin, l think I'd tend to go the other way and say no (although I'm not going to stake my pension on it)

From Rosecott's narrative, it seems it is normally close mown. Meaning it is not an issue that the mowers can't deal with - ie the mowers can normally cut it to fairway height. And usually it is, so players usually get pick & place relief.

But the rules tend to deal with fact - eg is that ball in bounds or not? Yes/No. In this case the question is, is it cut to faiway height? Factual answer - no, at the moment, it's not. (Should it be cut to fairway height is a different question). Ergo, l opine you have to take the fact at base value, and say its not fairway height and play ball as it lies until such time as grass is cut properly. And give the relevant greenkeeper a boot up the nethers, or otherwise find out if there is a reason why it is not now being cut to fairway height.

I now stand back and await to be shot down in flames.

I agree.
Once you start down the road of " it's normally cut short but it isn't now but we'll call it short anyway" route then you're entering dangerous territory.
How would a visitor playing an open know that this area is usually mown?
You can only go by what's Infront of you.

 

[Colin L]

Hmm. Interesting. Even though I am loathe to disagree with an opinion from Colin, l think I'd tend to go the other way and say no (although I'm not going to stake my pension on it)
.

Unduly flattering! But Rulie's opinion is a good deal weightier than mine. How small would a patch of slightly longer grass in the middle of a fairway need to be for you to consider that a ball lying on it is nonetheless in an area cut to fairway height? To reduce it to the ridiculous, if my ball is lying on a wee tuft of longer grass in the middle of the fairway, am I denied a preferred lie?

Setting the length of the grass apart for the moment, would you not see this depressed channel as part of the fairway just because of where it is? Or does the fairway stop for a two metre strip across and then start the other side?

Another thought .... fairway height is not defined. Say you brought a patch of fairway which had been re-seeded back into play but kept the grass a bit longer for a while for it to establish itself. In that particular part of the fairway, is the height of that grass not fairway height?

 

[rulefan]

Given that 'closely mown' is only defined in relation to the fairway, the whole fairway must be used as the yardstick. If it is of variable length, it is still the fairway.
'Closely mown' is not of itself a measure.

 

[duncan mackie]

My take - if the fairway mowers have mown it the actual resultant height isnt the issue; it meets the definition of faiway height , or less...

In the example give we are specifically advised that the area wasn't mown with the fairway mower cut and is clearly at the height off the first cut. I fail to see how it can qualify.

Should it happen, obviously not. Should it be resolved by the committee - yes, and quickly.

 

[jim8flog]

I have always thought that 'closely mown' is a bit of an'accepted wording' rather than what is says in the actual
rules which is grass cut (2019) /mown (2018) to fairway height less.
So if it is in the fairway and has been cut does this mean you can get relief in the first cut rough?

 

[duncan mackie]

I have always thought that 'closely mown' is a bit of an'accepted wording' rather than what is says in the actual
rules which is grass cut (2019) /mown (2018) to fairway height less.
So if it is in the fairway and has been cut does this mean you can get relief in the first cut rough?

Don't understand you question - if it's in the fairway how can it be in the first cut rough (regardless of whether it's been cut)?

Not the question asked but if it's on a cut (to fairway height of less) path in the middle of the rough you can get the benefit of preferred lie if the LR is in place.

 

[jim8flog]

Note the smiley. It was a joke response made to comments in the OP

 

[backwoodsman]

Given that 'closely mown' is only defined in relation to the fairway, the whole fairway must be used as the yardstick. If it is of variable length, it is still the fairway.
'Closely mown' is not of itself a measure.

Accepted that neither "closely mown" nor "fairway height" is specifically defined but given that the phrase is "Closely-mown area means any area of the course, including paths through the rough, cut to fairway height" or less then surely "fairway height or less" has to mean the normal height if what is generally accepted as fairway rather than the highest height of anything on tbe fairway?. If one accepted the highest length of any grass on the fairway, then a whole new scenario arises.

For instance, our course has drainage lines criss-crossing the fairways which constantly sink - no matter how many times they are topped up. The grass in these depressions simply cannot be cut by the fairway mowers - and consequently is 1 to 1.5 inches longer than what we would regard as "fairway height" - even though they are most definitely on the fairway. Should we regard any grass on the course of this length as closely mown? Obviously not, else pretty much all the first cut would be regarded as "closely mown". Yes you should have pick & place relief from these as (mostly) one is definitely in the middle of the fairway. But no, you should not have relief when on any grass of this length on the course.

Hence my opinion that closely mown (in terms of fairway height) has to mean the modal (most common) value of fairway height, rather than mean (average) or median (middle) value of height.

Ps: we get round it by having a local rule defining these channels as GUR - which solves a multitude of issues. IMO, the OP's course should do the same (if only by a white line) for this uncut bit until such time as it is cut.

 

[rulie]

Accepted that neither "closely mown" nor "fairway height" is specifically defined but given that the phrase is "Closely-mown area means any area of the course, including paths through the rough, cut to fairway height" or less then surely "fairway height or less" has to mean the normal height if what is generally accepted as fairway rather than the highest height of anything on tbe fairway?. If one accepted the highest length of any grass on the fairway, then a whole new scenario arises.

For instance, our course has drainage lines criss-crossing the fairways which constantly sink - no matter how many times they are topped up. The grass in these depressions simply cannot be cut by the fairway mowers - and consequently is 1 to 1.5 inches longer than what we would regard as "fairway height" - even though they are most definitely on the fairway. Should we regard any grass on the course of this length as closely mown? Obviously not, else pretty much all the first cut would be regarded as "closely mown". Yes you should have pick & place relief from these as (mostly) one is definitely in the middle of the fairway. But no, you should not have relief when on any grass of this length on the course.

Hence my opinion that closely mown (in terms of fairway height) has to mean the modal (most common) value of fairway height, rather than mean (average) or median (middle) value of height.

Ps: we get round it by having a local rule defining these channels as GUR - which solves a multitude of issues. IMO, the OP's course should do the same (if only by a white line) for this uncut bit until such time as it is cut.

Note that the OP seems to indicate that this is (was) a one time occurrence, as it's normally mowed with the fairway.

 

[rulefan]

Backwoodsman

I'll accept that

 

[Slab]

Accepted that neither "closely mown" nor "fairway height" is specifically defined but given that the phrase is "Closely-mown area means any area of the course, including paths through the rough, cut to fairway height" or less then surely "fairway height or less" has to mean the normal height if what is generally accepted as fairway rather than the highest height of anything on tbe fairway?. If one accepted the highest length of any grass on the fairway, then a whole new scenario arises.

For instance, our course has drainage lines criss-crossing the fairways which constantly sink - no matter how many times they are topped up. The grass in these depressions simply cannot be cut by the fairway mowers - and consequently is 1 to 1.5 inches longer than what we would regard as "fairway height" - even though they are most definitely on the fairway. Should we regard any grass on the course of this length as closely mown? Obviously not, else pretty much all the first cut would be regarded as "closely mown". Yes you should have pick & place relief from these as (mostly) one is definitely in the middle of the fairway. But no, you should not have relief when on any grass of this length on the course.

Hence my opinion that closely mown (in terms of fairway height) has to mean the modal (most common) value of fairway height, rather than mean (average) or median (middle) value of height.

Ps: we get round it by having a local rule defining these channels as GUR - which solves a multitude of issues. IMO, the OP's course should do the same (if only by a white line) for this uncut bit until such time as it is cut.

I was just thinking about GUR when reading the thread

to all; Would this rules logic that appears applicable in this scenario also apply to a patch of bare ground on a fairway that would normally be defined as GUR but for whatever reason has not been marked in this case.
Can the player then take the GUR relief even though it's not marked

(I assume not but am interested in the difference between the two sets of circumstances)

 

[rulie]

I was just thinking about GUR when reading the thread

to all; Would this rules logic that appears applicable in this scenario also apply to a patch of bare ground on a fairway that would normally be defined as GUR but for whatever reason has not been marked in this case.
Can the player then take the GUR relief even though it's not marked

(I assume not but am interested in the difference between the two sets of circumstances)

The player is not permitted to declare any area as GUR. In stroke play, he does have the option to play two balls and ask the Committee to provide the ruling. (current Rule 3-3)