Greensomes provisional

[backwoodsman]

Just a bit surprised it took so long to get "to the bottom of it". I'd have thought the fundamental principle of alternate shot format is that the next stroke at, or in relation, to a ball is played by the other player. "A" plays a ball that may be lost, so "B" plays the respective provisional.

As it's outside the RoG, yep comp committee can make up the rules. But I like the idea in "A" of Rulefan's post that a prov' can only be played if both may be lost, oob etc

 

[woody69]

Just a bit surprised it took so long to get "to the bottom of it". I'd have thought the fundamental principle of alternate shot format is that the next stroke at, or in relation, to a ball is played by the other player. "A" plays a ball that may be lost, so "B" plays the respective provisional.

As it's outside the RoG, yep comp committee can make up the rules. But I like the idea in "A" of Rulefan's post that a prov' can only be played if both may be lost, oob etc

Not sure I like option A to be honest as it seems to suggest a choice of drive has to be taken before you leave the tee in order to select the appropriate person to hit the provisional.

In terms of the match, I nailed my drive so no problem was needed. Unfortunately my partner pulled it into the left hand greenside bunker and I thinned it straight over the green and we lost the hole! Still won the match though!, 5&3

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

..and I wasn't sure as I thought it curious that having lost my ball and my had partner played 'my' provisional I would have the choice of which ball to play for our 2nd/4th shot.

Of course I now understand that the very act of my PP playing a provisional for my lost ball deems my ball to be the ball selected to play out the hole, my PPs own tee shot is not now an option.

 

[rulefan]

..and I wasn't sure as I thought it curious that having lost my ball and my had partner played 'my' provisional I would have the choice of which ball to play for our 2nd/4th shot.

Of course I now understand that the very act of my PP playing a provisional for my lost ball deems my ball to be the ball selected to play out the hole, my PPs own tee shot is not now an option.

Don't confuse 'partner' with PP (playing partner).

The former (used correctly in this case) is defined as "a player associated with another player on the same side.In threesome, foursome, best-ball or four-ball play, where the context so admits, the word “player” includes his partner or partners."

The latter is an undefined term often used confusingly by TV commentators to describe a 'fellow competitor', which is defined "any person with whom the competitor plays. Neither is partner of the other."

It is an incorrect term in this context.

 

[woody69]

..and I wasn't sure as I thought it curious that having lost my ball and my had partner played 'my' provisional I would have the choice of which ball to play for our 2nd/4th shot.

Of course I now understand that the very act of my partner playing a provisional for my lost ball deems my ball to be the ball selected to play out the hole, my partners own tee shot is not now an option.

That's the crux of the matter really. It's forcing you to make a decision on the tee and I am not sure I agree with that seeing as the only reason to hit a provisional is to save time. It seems unfair that if B decides to hit a provisional in case As original is lost or OOB (and B's is in an even worse likely scenario), but then on getting down they find B's original and it isn't lost. They have effectively been penalised for trying to speed the game up a little. Why risk it? I'd always go forward and then once you know for certain both A and Bs original is OOB or lost you have to go back to the tee.

 

[doublebogey7]

That's the crux of the matter really. It's forcing you to make a decision on the tee and I am not sure I agree with that seeing as the only reason to hit a provisional is to save time. It seems unfair that if B decides to hit a provisional in case As original is lost or OOB (and B's is in an even worse likely scenario), but then on getting down they find B's original and it isn't lost. They have effectively been penalised for trying to speed the game up a little. Why risk it? I'd always go forward and then once you know for certain both A and Bs original is OOB or lost you have to go back to the tee.

No you don't, as explained earlier you can hit a provisional only if both balls MAY be lost or OOB. But the provisional ball has to be a abandoned if either ball is found in bounds.

 

[woody69]

No you don't, as explained earlier you can hit a provisional only if both balls MAY be lost or OOB. But the provisional ball has to be a abandoned if either ball is found in bounds.

Furry muff. Missed the wording on that.

 

[duncan mackie]

Furry muff. Missed the wording on that.

You might also consider the following consistent with your argument around fairness.

A&B drive as normal but both balls roll OOB. If they don't realise this but walk up and find them then they clearly have to decide who's playing the next shot in normal greensomes play - that player will walk back and play.
If, on the other hand, they feel that they may have gone OOB on the tee then how can it be fair that they both play provisionals and get to choose the better one?
If you feel that in the first example they should both be able to return to the tee (the it's greensomes so you can both play from the tee argument) then where do you draw the line? Both players balls are deemed unplayable with the only option to return and play from the tee? Both balls in a water hazard? One OOB and one in a water hazard? Etc.

 

[Old Skier]

I'm starting to regret running a greensomes comp next week.

 

[duncan mackie]

I'm starting to regret running a greensomes comp next week.

Pm Colin for his set of greensomes rules.

There are more issues with texas scrambles it's just that because the teams playing are all playing together fewer issues surface!

 

[woody69]

You might also consider the following consistent with your argument around fairness.

A&B drive as normal but both balls roll OOB. If they don't realise this but walk up and find them then they clearly have to decide who's playing the next shot in normal greensomes play - that player will walk back and play.
If, on the other hand, they feel that they may have gone OOB on the tee then how can it be fair that they both play provisionals and get to choose the better one?
If you feel that in the first example they should both be able to return to the tee (the it's greensomes so you can both play from the tee argument) then where do you draw the line? Both players balls are deemed unplayable with the only option to return and play from the tee? Both balls in a water hazard? One OOB and one in a water hazard? Etc.

That's the point of Greensomes thought right? You get an opportunity to both put a ball in play. Why should a restriction be put on the players.

Player 1 drives but may be OOB
Player 2 drives into the rubbish 50 yards ahead that may or may not be found

Why isn't it feasible that both A and B get to hit a "provisional"? Find player A not OOB, then fine. Find ball hit into the rubbish by B, then fine go through the options, but why not decide, that the prov hit by A is now in position A so don't bother looking for B and be playing 4th stroke.

You draw the line at the time. So if both balls are in a water hazard, then the players decide who hits next as they would if both balls were playable. If one is OOB and one is in the water hazard, again they make the decision. That would mean player B hitting a prov for the one OOB and then they decide whether to take that ball or take the drop from the hazard.

 

[rulefan]

Surely the fundamental is that each player has one (and only one) opportunity to play a stroke off the tee.
After that, the side must choose which player plays next and what he is going to do.

1) play either of the balls in play (including playing under 28)
2) play a provisional for a ball OOB, regardless of whether the other is on the course.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

You might also consider the following consistent with your argument around fairness.

A&B drive as normal but both balls roll OOB. If they don't realise this but walk up and find them then they clearly have to decide who's playing the next shot in normal greensomes play - that player will walk back and play.
If, on the other hand, they feel that they may have gone OOB on the tee then how can it be fair that they both play provisionals and get to choose the better one?
If you feel that in the first example they should both be able to return to the tee (the it's greensomes so you can both play from the tee argument) then where do you draw the line? Both players balls are deemed unplayable with the only option to return and play from the tee? Both balls in a water hazard? One OOB and one in a water hazard? Etc.

Isn't it going to be the case in your scenario that the first player of the pair who plays the provisional is the ball in play and the second provisional is irrelevant? You just choose which of the two of you is going to play the provisional and he become the 'player in play',, because the provisional is the next shot after the tee shot and actually nothing to do with the tee shot itself

 

[woody69]

Surely the fundamental is that each player has one (and only one) opportunity to play a stroke off the tee.
After that, the side must choose which player plays next and what he is going to do.

1) play either of the balls in play (including playing under 28)
2) play a provisional for a ball OOB, regardless of whether the other is on the course.

How can they decide which player plays next though if both players have a situation where they could by all accounts play a provisional?

If you played in a strokeplay comp and your first tee shot was potentially OOB then you would play a provisional. If you played a tee shot and it was potentially lost, then you would play a provisional. Why can the same not be applied for 2 players who could realistically encounter that scenario. It just seems a little unfair that it effectively forces a player to decide on the tee, which shot requires a provisional.

In Greensomes you get to decide on which drive you think is best out of 2 chances. Why can the same not be done with the prov. If Player A hits OOB and Player B nobbles his 100 yards up the fairway, but then hits a provisional for Player A and it sails 300 yards, why can't they claim to take that rather be forced to take the initial ball from B? They're still playing their 4th and it still saves time.

 

[rulie]

How can they decide which player plays next though if both players have a situation where they could by all accounts play a provisional?

If you played in a strokeplay comp and your first tee shot was potentially OOB then you would play a provisional. If you played a tee shot and it was potentially lost, then you would play a provisional. Why can the same not be applied for 2 players who could realistically encounter that scenario. It just seems a little unfair that it effectively forces a player to decide on the tee, which shot requires a provisional.

In Greensomes you get to decide on which drive you think is best out of 2 chances. Why can the same not be done with the prov. If Player A hits OOB and Player B nobbles his 100 yards up the fairway, but then hits a provisional for Player A and it sails 300 yards, why can't they claim to take that rather be forced to take the initial ball from B? They're still playing their 4th and it still saves time.

Therein lies the reasons that the Committee in charge of the competition must outline the procedures for this type of competition, which is not within the Rules of golf.

One could say that, in the situation you have described, the two players do have a choice of which drive of two to take - the one that is OOB or the one that 100 yards up the fairway. Allowing a provisional actually gives them a choice of three.

 

[rulefan]

How can they decide which player plays next though if both players have a situation where they could by all accounts play a provisional?

How do they decide which player plays next if both balls are 6" apart in the middle of the fairway?

If you played in a strokeplay comp .....

But it isn't. That is the problem.



In a greensome both players have had a chance to make decent fist of it. The side shouldn't deserve a second bite.
In a foursome, if one player makes a mess of it his partner has to sort it out.