Greensomes Provisional ball?

[Old Skier]

It's no issues - already confirmed with them that it's fine as they "recommend" what HC allocation you use and its not a strict rule that must be adhered to.

Greensomes are not official qualifying comps for HC purposes so it makes not one single difference what HC allocation people use - had that confirmed with them as well.

Agree with you whole heartily and as rulefan states, work needs to be done by comp committees to sort out how they want the game played.

The problem I have with some is because they (CONGU) recommend, we have certain members who go loopy if you don't follow the recommendations. My comment remains, if it's not a recognised comp then don't mention it.

 

[rulefan]

CONGU only recommends for Greensomes.

That has already been said and understood.

 

[rulefan]

It's no issues - already confirmed with them that it's fine as they "recommend" what HC allocation you use and its not a strict rule that must be adhered to.

Greensomes are not official qualifying comps for HC purposes so it makes not one single difference what HC allocation people use - had that confirmed with them as well.

The EGA and USGA both specify 60/40 but the USGA is mandatory.
The EGA is a recommendation but a national union may make it mandatory.

 

[Foxholer]

CONGU only recommends for Greensomes.

Probably because of the outstanding question about what to do if both Tee Shots OOB (and the playing of a Provisional) and the 'unofficial' nature of the form - though played often enough to warrant a recommendation.

I'd expect a Greensomes team handicap to be slightly lower than a Foursomes one - weighted because of the likelihood of taking the lower handicapper's Drive more often.

Does also indicate that CofCs should have a process for how Provisional/Both OOB should be handled.

 

[rulefan]

Does also indicate that CofCs should have a process for how Provisional/Both OOB should be handled.

It has taken many years for a lot of very qualified people to not come to an agreement

 

[delc]

U

That is the question that has never yet been answered authoritatively. See post #3.
Over the years there have been many discussions (arguments) about how this should be handled. Some common ideas are below. There are probably others.

The only definitive conclusion I have seen is that the Committee should specify the process in the Conditions of Competition. Most don't and are then surprised when the winners are accused of using the 'wrong' process.


Both players play another ball from the tee announcing they are provisionals

Case 1)
A plays a provisional (for B's ball?) and B plays a provisional (for A's ball?).
May they then choose the best 'provisional' playing 3 off the tee

Case 2)
A plays a provisional and B plays a second 'provisional', is B's ball a provisional for the original ball or for A's provisional playing 5 off the tee.

Case 3) As Case 2) but if A's provisional may not be lost or OOB, is B's second ball now the ball in play? How many counting stroke have they?

I can understand the principle in Foursomes that if A's ball may be lost or OOB, then B plays the provisional or second ball, but in greensomes neither player has any precedence on the tee. So in the fairly unlikely scenario that both balls may be lost or OOB, then surely both players should each play a provisional ball.

 

[Foxholer]

U
I can understand the principle in Foursomes that if A's ball may be lost or OOB, then B plays the provisional or second ball, but in greensomes neither player has any precedence on the tee. So in the fairly unlikely scenario that both balls may be lost or OOB, then surely both players should play a provisional ball.

That would be the least likely (and a very poor) ruling imo!

The bold bit should really state 'neither player has any precedence for the first stroke'. So there needs to be some definition for how (provisionally) the player who will take the 3rd stroke is proposed. And the obvious (and best) place for that is the CofCs.

 

[duncan mackie]

U
I can understand the principle in Foursomes that if A's ball may be lost or OOB, then B plays the provisional or second ball, but in greensomes neither player has any precedence on the tee. So in the fairly unlikely scenario that both balls may be lost or OOB, then surely both players should each play a provisional ball.

no provisional but both balls found in the same water hazard - by you logic if the player's decide to play their next shot from the tee they can play another 2 shots and choose from the outcome....but if they were to drop behind the point of entry they would have to decide which of he drives (that went in the water) are being selected and therefore which player plays next.

Which is why that logic is flawed.

 

[delc]

no provisional but both balls found in the same water hazard - by you logic if the player's decide to play their next shot from the tee they can play another 2 shots and choose from the outcome....but if they were to drop behind the point of entry they would have to decide which of he drives (that went in the water) are being selected and therefore which player plays next.

Which is why that logic is flawed.

But we are not talking about water hazards here!

 

[Foxholer]

But we are not talking about water hazards here!

So who would play the next shot! Same logic!

 

[delc]

So who would play the next shot! Same logic!

But if both balls have gone into a water hazard, you have (usually) made some distance and you can chose the ball which crossed the hazard line in the most advantageous position!