Hypothetical question

[Imurg]

Imagine a green.
The approach is uphill a tad, the front of the green then slopes down hill to halfway along the green and then climbs again.
The pin is on the front half of the green so the base of the flag cannot be seen.
Player A plays and hits the green on the front half - that is known as the ball cannot be seen, if it could it would be on the back half.
Player B then plays. His ball hits Player A's ball. Player A's ball then rolls to the back of the green - it can now be seen.

PLayer B's ball is played as it lies
Players A's ball must be replaced.

But how do you know where to replace it?
It was invisible from the fairway but was on the front half of the green
How can it be replaced?
Is it fair to play Player A's ball as it lies as a spot to replace is not known....?

 

[rulefan]

The player must make his best estimate of where it should be placed.

 

[Imurg]

But how?
The ball could have been anywhere on the front half of the green....
30 feet away or 3 inches....

 

[palindromicbob]

This one is definitely one to give you headache!

Firstly the rules state that players A's ball must be replaced so to play it as it lies would be a breech because is it known/virtually certain that it had been moved by player B's ball due to the circumstances presented above.

I would then apply 1-4 and apply the principles offered by the exemption of 20-3 c when a spot can not be determined after resumption in play. I would use available information (pitch marks, line of player B's shot etc) to estimate the spot and place it in that agreed spot. If distance could not be determined then I would say that a point half way between the furthest and nearest points possible would be most equitable.

Could also apply 3-3 and play a ball from both spots but the fact the rules say a ball must be replaced if moved by another ball then this would probably be redundant.

 

[duncan mackie]

This one is definitely one to give you headache!

Firstly the rules state that players A's ball must be replaced so to play it as it lies would be a breech because is it known/virtually certain that it had been moved by player B's ball due to the circumstances presented above.

I would then apply 1-4 and apply the principles offered by the exemption of 20-3 c when a spot can not be determined after resumption in play. I would use available information (pitch marks, line of player B's shot etc) to estimate the spot and place it in that agreed spot. If distance could not be determined then I would say that a point half way between the furthest and nearest points possible would be most equitable.

Could also apply 3-3 and play a ball from both spots but the fact the rules say a ball must be replaced if moved by another ball then this would probably be redundant.

good summary

3-3 would only be relevant if you didn't know how to proceed so, as you suggest, if you know it has to be replaced then it would be inappropriate to play one of the balls from where it had come to rest ie you know that's wrong!

if both players can agree on a point, based on the balance of probabilities, then great - that's the spot. If not, and there's considerable disparity, play from both under 3-3 and discuss with the committee - a picture showing both positions and the hole is appreciated by many committees!

 

[bladeplayer]

good summary

3-3 would only be relevant if you didn't know how to proceed so, as you suggest, if you know it has to be replaced then it would be inappropriate to play one of the balls from where it had come to rest ie you know that's wrong!

if both players can agree on a point, based on the balance of probabilities, then great - that's the spot. If not, and there's considerable disparity, play from both under 3-3 and discuss with the committee - a picture showing both positions and the hole is appreciated by many committees!

What a cracking question Imurg ,

the 1st green at woodenbridge has a big hidden section on it where this very scenario could happen .. my additional question if i may ask is .. if it was a scramble could you agree it was 2 inches from the hole and not be breaking the rules ?

 

[duncan mackie]

What a cracking question Imurg ,

the 1st green at woodenbridge has a big hidden section on it where this very scenario could happen .. my additional question if i may ask is .. if it was a scramble could you agree it was 2 inches from the hole and not be breaking the rules ?

of course - as the rules don't cover scrambles!

more seriously the answer is that you should follow the same processes as if you were playing against each other - sadly many people simply don't in scrambles but that's another thing.

 

[rulefan]

good summary

3-3 would only be relevant if you didn't know how to proceed so, as you suggest, if you know it has to be replaced then it would be inappropriate to play one of the balls from where it had come to rest ie you know that's wrong!

if both players can agree on a point, based on the balance of probabilities, then great - that's the spot. If not, and there's considerable disparity, play from both under 3-3 and discuss with the committee - a picture showing both positions and the hole is appreciated by many committees!

As you are referring to strokeplay, there is no requirement to discuss anything with any other player. He may seek relevant factual information from anyone but ultimately the decision is the player's. If anyone is unhappy with it then they must take it up with the committee.

But how does 3-3 help? How many possible places is he going to choose from? The top of the slope, the middle or the bottom? He is only allowed to play 2 balls.

 

[sev112]

This is SERIOUSLY the best question I have seen on this forum

 

[williamalex1]

Don't want to highjack the thread but . Something similar happened about 30 years ago at Greenburn gc Fauldhouse. my drive from the 3rd tee collided in mid air with a ball being played onto the 2nd green, which you have to drive over btw.
My ball went straight on the other ball went ob. and was ruled ob . by officials back in club house. Was that the correct ruling back in the dark old days.?

 

[Colin L]

Yes. It would have been the correct ruling 30 years ago as it would be now.

 

[williamalex1]

Yes. It would have been the correct ruling 30 years ago as it would be now.

Thanks Colin, anyone know the odds on 2 golf ball colliding in mid air, and has it happened to anyone else. ??

 

[sev112]

Thanks Colin, anyone know the odds on 2 golf ball colliding in mid air, and has it happened to anyone else. ??

Yes it is za surprisingly easy calculation ...