Practice during round

[Backache]

Well effayjay, I still have to say that I think the penalty was correct as you thought originally, as controversial as that might appear to some in here.

Once the player gave up and didn't go back to tee, I think it is a completely logical assumption that they had completed the hole at that point. Had you been by their side, and knew what was happening, you could have stuck a big fat zero points on their card before proceeding with the hole yourself. If it is assumed they have completed the hole, then they are between the play of 2 holes, and we all seem to agree a practice stroke can't be made at that point otherwise the penalty applies to next hole.

The difference is, many in here think the player can put another ball back in play anywhere they like after apparently completing the hole, we think they can't until they go back to tee.

If the former are correct, it leads to all sorts of potentially ridiculous situations, some of which I've already stated. Another. What if they didn't drop another ball down but walked straight to next tee. They saw a range ball, took full set up and took a full swing to smack it back in range. Is that a practice stroke between 2 holes? I would have thought so, but if they haven't holed out on last can they just claim they were playing from wrong place. Or, is the difference that the ball is not his or says Range on it so it can be deemed a practice stroke. What if he dropped his own ball.down and hit it on range? Maybe that's a practice stroke as he's not aiming at the correct green?

Also, what if player does what he did, then drops another ball down, a 3rd, a 4th, etc. Is he just playing the wrong ball now, so still the penalties only apply to the blob hole. At what point do we start saying this isn't on, we'll need to invoke Rule 1.2 as he is not playing in the spirit of the game. That's difficult if he genuinely believes he is doing nothing wrong and using the rules to his advantage.

If this incident occurred at our club, and I was on Committee and asked to make the decision, my only argument to say no penalty would he "majority of golfers on forum believe it's no penalty, and rulefan asked his contact at R&A". As rulefan is apparently someone with high standard in regard to the Rules, hopefully he'd agree that this would be a poor response if he were in the same position, easily challenged by the player calling the penalty. However, out of respect of rulefan and others, my approach would be different now. Before this thread, I'd have said the penalty applied. However, now that this thread has exploded into this, I'd refer the decision directly to the R&A.

Mate without going through your post point by point, you go through a whole lot of hypothetical situations , some of which are clearly covered by the rules and then disagree with the rules officials on here.
The OP got a perfectly courteous reception from me at least who whilst disagreeing agreed that there was an area of doubt., which was clarified on here.
He then proceeded to disagree with the clarification, substantially altered his story, and appeared to take the somewhat pious and hypocritical stance:

That strict adherence to the rules is vitally important and simultaneously claim that he only mentioned what he still firmly believes is an infraction because his mate had scored low so it didn't matter.

He claims he will have a good laugh about it.
He is either trolling the forum and taking up the freely given time and effort of the rules experts here or he is a complete humbug or both.

 

[PJ87]

Well effayjay, I still have to say that I think the penalty was correct as you thought originally, as controversial as that might appear to some in here.

Once the player gave up and didn't go back to tee, I think it is a completely logical assumption that they had completed the hole at that point. Had you been by their side, and knew what was happening, you could have stuck a big fat zero points on their card before proceeding with the hole yourself. If it is assumed they have completed the hole, then they are between the play of 2 holes, and we all seem to agree a practice stroke can't be made at that point otherwise the penalty applies to next hole.

The difference is, many in here think the player can put another ball back in play anywhere they like after apparently completing the hole, we think they can't until they go back to tee.

If the former are correct, it leads to all sorts of potentially ridiculous situations, some of which I've already stated. Another. What if they didn't drop another ball down but walked straight to next tee. They saw a range ball, took full set up and took a full swing to smack it back in range. Is that a practice stroke between 2 holes? I would have thought so, but if they haven't holed out on last can they just claim they were playing from wrong place. Or, is the difference that the ball is not his or says Range on it so it can be deemed a practice stroke. What if he dropped his own ball.down and hit it on range? Maybe that's a practice stroke as he's not aiming at the correct green?

Also, what if player does what he did, then drops another ball down, a 3rd, a 4th, etc. Is he just playing the wrong ball now, so still the penalties only apply to the blob hole. At what point do we start saying this isn't on, we'll need to invoke Rule 1.2 as he is not playing in the spirit of the game. That's difficult if he genuinely believes he is doing nothing wrong and using the rules to his advantage.

If this incident occurred at our club, and I was on Committee and asked to make the decision, my only argument to say no penalty would he "majority of golfers on forum believe it's no penalty, and rulefan asked his contact at R&A". As rulefan is apparently someone with high standard in regard to the Rules, hopefully he'd agree that this would be a poor response if he were in the same position, easily challenged by the player calling the penalty. However, out of respect of rulefan and others, my approach would be different now. Before this thread, I'd have said the penalty applied. However, now that this thread has exploded into this, I'd refer the decision directly to the R&A.

Give it up, you are wrong.. be a man and accept it dont try and continue with making yourself look more of an idiot

 

[effayjay]

To be honest the posts that interest me are those of Rulefan and Duncan M. That was why I came on this part of the forum, to get their informed views. Rule-fan is clear that there was no breach, Duncan is not in total agreement. Thanks to both for there responses. I’m off.

 

[rulefan]

Rulefan, ultimately you have still.had to seek advice from the R&A to clarify your stance, which clearly implies there was at least an element of doubt. You must also realise that the vast majority of golfers do not have the benefit of a direct line to the R&A, so at minimum the rules need some tidying up. Most other rules are obvious and can be easily cleared up.

I know that you do not care what I say or the OP, but I gather there is a lot of respect for Duncan, who has at least conceded as much, that there could be an element of doubt. Yet not once would anyone dare criticize him, nor should they.

The OP has simply said they applied the rule as they saw fit at the time, and also open to being wrong. It was innocent. Perhaps they could contact the R&A themselves, but as you say, their query is unlikely to get a quick reply unless done officially via their club.

Therefore, we ask and discuss these things on a forum like this to seek quicker answers. Doesn't help though when others chip in with obnoxious irrelevant comments (not you rulefan)

The words in the books may not be satisfactory but the R&A have made a ruling. Why would I, you or anyone else now have any doubt? As it seems some have, the only resolution is to contact the R&A.
You accuse me of not caring. Why would I have gone to trouble of discussing the matter with the R&A if I had no interest in the question being raised?
There was also an offensive remark implying I could not be trusted. Why would I continue unless I wished to see the issue resolved?

 

[duncan mackie]

I am afraid that there remains sufficient lack of clarity to me over both the situation presented and the basis for any ruling.

As originally presented in the opening post, and without any discussion with the player that may, or may not clarify the situation, I can't see any basis for a breach of the rules. He didn't have a ball to pick up and hadn't otherwise holed out as Rule fan set out against the wording of the rule. As such his play fell into the lose category of playing out the hole and his strokes didn't constitute practice as exempted by 5.5a. The words actually used, and now referenced in various posts, may or may not have any relevance to a ruling but I serous struggle to believe that an intention to pick up in a state of mind when playing on, is a basis for ruling here.

My wider concern is over the seemingly wide range of situations that could reasonably exist in this general area - taking 2 simple ones as working examples...
1. Player advises his marker that he is no longer able to score and is picking up but as they are being held up so much, so he will just play on.
2. Player picks up his ball from a path, says I can't score so I will pick up, reconsiders and realises he would get a point if he holes this one, takes relief from path, drops plays and then plays further strokes to hole out.
With what's been discussed, and the rules as written, I wouldn't feel comfortable ruling at all.

My underlying belief is that the intention of the rules is that if you stop playing a hole you are not permitted to make further strokes from a place of you chosen up until the point of holing out - but that you can continue play if you chose. A simple concept that becomes complex in practice.

 

[rulefan]

My understanding of practice is making strokes without the primary intention of making further direct progress toward the hole.
This would therefore include multiple shots from the same place, shots from an unreasonable position and shots towards an irrelevant target.

I would also suggest that intent and the expectation that golf is an honourable game is of relevance.

 

[effayjay]

Rulefan, what is your view on the following? it did happen a week or two before the incident we have been discussing ( and was the reason I looked up the rules and came to the interpretation that I did).

During a qualifying comp a pp tees off with a driver. Before leaving the tee he then takes another tee shot with a newly acquired 3 wood as he wants to compare distances. He subsequently picks his second ball up and continues with his first.

I suppose you could argue that the second ball became the ball in play and then plays the wrong ball for the rest of the hole, I concluded however that he had practiced whilst playing the hole.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Rulefan, what is your view on the following? it did happen a week or two before the incident we have been discussing ( and was the reason I looked up the rules and came to the interpretation that I did).

During a qualifying comp a pp tees off with a driver. Before leaving the tee he then takes another tee shot with a newly acquired 3 wood as he wants to compare distances. He subsequently picks his second ball up and continues with his first.

I suppose you could argue that the second ball became the ball in play and then plays the wrong ball for the rest of the hole, I concluded however that he had practiced whilst playing the hole.

Did he say he was taking a “provisional” ?

If not the second ball is in play and the minute he picks it up he is DQ from that hole.

You can’t conclude “practise” when his first actions are what counts - playing 3 off the tee.

What I highlighted is exactly what it is

 

[rulefan]

Rulefan, what is your view on the following? it did happen a week or two before the incident we have been discussing ( and was the reason I looked up the rules and came to the interpretation that I did).

During a qualifying comp a pp tees off with a driver. Before leaving the tee he then takes another tee shot with a newly acquired 3 wood as he wants to compare distances. He subsequently picks his second ball up and continues with his first.

I suppose you could argue that the second ball became the ball in play and then plays the wrong ball for the rest of the hole, I concluded however that he had practiced whilst playing the hole.

Even if I had not written the above 'definition', I would consider it to be practising. It matches my 'definition' in at least two respects, including intent.
It is not uncommon to see a player duff a shot and after a few expletives, drop a ball and play the same shot again, then pick the second ball up and continue with the first. I have always thought of this and 'trying out a club' as practice. It appears that others do not agree but I have never had to rule on this and am happy to be corrected.

I assume the three wood was in his 14 club limit

 

[robinthehood]

Rulefan, what is your view on the following? it did happen a week or two before the incident we have been discussing ( and was the reason I looked up the rules and came to the interpretation that I did).

During a qualifying comp a pp tees off with a driver. Before leaving the tee he then takes another tee shot with a newly acquired 3 wood as he wants to compare distances. He subsequently picks his second ball up and continues with his first.

I suppose you could argue that the second ball became the ball in play and then plays the wrong ball for the rest of the hole, I concluded however that he had practiced whilst playing the hole.

Yes it sounds like a practice shot and his next shot should be his 4th.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Even if I had not written the above 'definition', I would consider it to be practising. It matches my 'definition' in at least two respects, including intent.
It is not uncommon to see a player duff a shot and after a few expletives, drop a ball and play the same shot again, then pick the second ball up and continue with the first. I have always thought of this and 'trying out a club' as practice. It appears that others do not agree but I have never had to rule on this and am happy to be corrected.

I assume the three wood was in his 14 club limit

For me the minute he hits that second ball without any declaration its the ball in play - now you could say he was practising by saying " provisional" and just hitting another ball when he knows his other is clearly in play.

But as soon as he plays the second ball without any declaration then its in play - if he picks it up he has then NR'd that hole - if he plays the original then its playing the wrong ball because that ball became dead the minute he hit the second off the tee. Either way its a DQ for that hole

 

[rulefan]

he wants to compare distances

I think we need to know if he actually expressed that intent

 

[Orikoru]

Thanks Duncan and rulesfan.

I think finally we may be getting to the bottom of why there are the differences in opinion.

Rulesfan has assumes "picking up" means literally. This did not happen in the OP, therefore you can say no penalty. I get that.

My interpretation of "picking up" is giving up, whether literally picking ball up or not. If that was correct, then Duncan makes the point that a penalty would apply as your between 2 holes.

So, that probably needs more clarity in the Rules.

He lost the ball so how could he literally pick it up anyway?? Talk about a moot point.

 

[effayjay]

I think we need to know if he actually expressed that intent

Yes, he said he wanted to compare distance with his new 3 wood against his drive

 

[rulefan]

I don't see the 3 wood incident as significantly different to taking a full blown wedge to return a ball to the driving range when a chip with any club would have sufficed.

 

[berniethebolt]

What a classic example of obsessive compulsive disorder. You adopt a point of view and no reasoned argument or statement of facts will move you one iota. You resort to more and more extreme examples to try to support your position and end up insulting those who know better.
Surely the point is that golf must be unique among ball games in being played over such a varied range of terrain - not only grass but trees, rocks, holes, ponds etc. - each of which require slightly different procedures to be followed. It is impossible to write down rules to cover every possible eventuality so what the rule makers do to keep the rule book reasonably sized is specify things that are important - "you must ...." or "you must not ......" - and leave many others deliberately vague in order for common sense to take over. If the R&A had felt it important they could easily have stated in the rule something to the effect of "Playing Stableford, once a player has reached the stage when they cannot score on a hole they MUST NOT play any further shots on that hole. If they do then this is considered practice and they get a general penalty on the next hole". They did not do so for good reasons and have effectively confirmed that this was their intention. Please let this go.

 

[Italian outcast]

A gentle but genuine aside

RE "take your time" - the old proverbial chestnut raised occasionally in this thread

It was said by a PP to another PP often in a recent comp, and I had no problem with that (and as been said by some above - not generally considered formal advice or penalty in actuality - though others do seem willing to apply penalties to such offenders)

.....but if it were.......equally would "hurry up tiger, get a move on" or summat stronger not also be similar 'advice' and as such encouraging/enforcing pace of play by your partners always lead to you being penalised

Perhaps we could collectively (obviously using standard consensus approaches) develop an appropriate 'penalty-free' statement to be used

We Scottish have a range of suitable phrases using the more subject neutral 'imperative' that could be a starting point - though some modification may be necessary for any subsequent R&A endorsement

 

[clubchamp98]

What a classic example of obsessive compulsive disorder. You adopt a point of view and no reasoned argument or statement of facts will move you one iota. You resort to more and more extreme examples to try to support your position and end up insulting those who know better.
Surely the point is that golf must be unique among ball games in being played over such a varied range of terrain - not only grass but trees, rocks, holes, ponds etc. - each of which require slightly different procedures to be followed. It is impossible to write down rules to cover every possible eventuality so what the rule makers do to keep the rule book reasonably sized is specify things that are important - "you must ...." or "you must not ......" - and leave many others deliberately vague in order for common sense to take over. If the R&A had felt it important they could easily have stated in the rule something to the effect of "Playing Stableford, once a player has reached the stage when they cannot score on a hole they MUST NOT play any further shots on that hole. If they do then this is considered practice and they get a general penalty on the next hole". They did not do so for good reasons and have effectively confirmed that this was their intention. Please let this go.

A very sensible post.

Some people I know would never get a chance to putt if the max shot ,can’t score. was the rule.

 

[Swango1980]

A very sensible post.

Some people I know would never get a chance to putt if the max shot ,can’t score. was the rule.

Yet you both are talking about something completely different. Nobody ever said a shot is considered a practice stroke as soon as you can no longer score a point. The rules are very clear on that.

 

[Swango1980]

In this post, I'm not disputing any rule with anyone. But, I genuinely want to know the answer.

Playing a 570 yard par 5. I have an absolute nightmare off the tee. 150 yards in, I give up as I'd need to get up and down from under the trees, 420 yards out from the green. Unlikely . I pick my ball up, stick it in my pocket and start walking the hole as my playing partners continue.

180 yards from the green I decide I'm bored. So, I take the ball out of my pocket and play a shot to green. Can I do this?

Personally, I'd never have dreamed of doing this, I would have thought anyone could accuse me of hitting a practice stroke between holes, regardless of my intent. At the very least, it could be considered against the spirit of the game, especially if there was a 180 yard par 3 coming up (but even without that, my concern would still stand)?

So, the purpose of my persistence is because I genuinely want to know, can I do this or is it OK to let others do it. I wouldn't want to get it wrong in a big comp. If so, great, but I'm still struggling to be comfortable with that.

The only reason why I have previously given alternative scenarios is to highlight the weakness in the R&A wording AFTER others have highlighted that wording to support their stance.

So, if you can genuinely answer this scenario, let me know your genuine thought. All I'm asking for. Thanks.