Rake Placement in Bunker - Reader - I pulled up a FC

[Wolf]

A revetted bunker face is not an immovable obstruction if it constructed from turf(s) or other natural substance (although I have only seen turf used).
However, if it is constructed from or includes artificial material then it is an immovable obstruction.

Incidentally, an Obstruction is Any artificial object . An Integral Object is an artificial object defined by the Committee (as such).
Integral Part of the Course is no longer a defined term and does not appear in the rules.

So does that mean after all the pointless back and forth on this thread it really doesn't matter where the rake is left as we'd be entitled to relief under the rules of golf.

Absolutely brilliant and sums up the pointlessness of clubs requests 😂

 

[rulefan]

Are you talking about artificial or turf revetted faces?
Under what rule do you suggest you would get relief?
You only get free relief from an IO by dropping in the bunker not nearer the hole. So that doesn't help if the ball is trapped by a rake at the back of a bunker.

 

[clubchamp98]

Are you talking about artificial or turf revetted faces?
Under what rule do you suggest you would get relief?
You only get free relief from an IO by dropping in the bunker not nearer the hole. So that doesn't help if the ball is trapped by a rake at the back of a bunker.

It does if you are going to hit it in backswing or downswing .
But if you have nowhere to drop that’s a bit unfair as by the look of the bunkers in pics it’s all the way around.

We have had this problem with steps put in the bunkers depending where they put the flag you can have nowhere (not nearer the hole) to drop.
So in major comps the flags are placed to make sure the players have relief in the bunker.

Where will this using artificial stuff end maybe hybrid greens .

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

A revetted bunker face is not an immovable obstruction if it constructed from turf(s) or other natural substance (although I have only seen turf used).
However, if it is constructed from or includes artificial material then it is an immovable obstruction.

Incidentally, an Obstruction is Any artificial object . An Integral Object is an artificial object defined by the Committee (as such).
Integral Part of the Course is no longer a defined term and does not appear in the rules.

I will check again but the answer I got from the club was very clear- and our Golf Manager is usually pretty hot on the new rules. We absolutely do NOT get relief from the revetted face of the bunker - clearly otherwise would be complete nonsense. That the layers of the revetting are old astroturf is surely neither here nor there - it is simply the construction of the bunker. There is nothing artificial that is not a designed part of the course. Besides - his strong view was that unless something is declared in our LRs to be an IO then, by definition, it is not an IO.

But I'd recheck.

BTW where do the rules say that a revetted face can only be constructed using turf(s) or other natural substance. Also whilst what you have written implies natural turf - is that actually the case - because 'turf' could include 'astroturf'.

 

[rulefan]

If the revetted turfs include a synthetic material (ie an artificial product), the synthetic material is an obstruction. If it doesn't, it isn't. If the latter is true of your bunkers, your Golf Manager is right.
The new rules have not changed anything.

Obstruction
Any artificial object

 

[clubchamp98]

I will check again but the answer I got from the club was very clear- and our Golf Manager is usually pretty hot on the new rules. We absolutely do NOT get relief from the revetted face of the bunker - clearly otherwise would be complete nonsense. That the layers of the revetting are old astroturf is surely neither here nor there - it is simply the construction of the bunker. There is nothing artificial that is not a designed part of the course. Besides - his strong view was that unless something is declared in our LRs to be an IO then, by definition, it is not an IO.

But I'd recheck.

BTW where do the rules say that a revetted face can only be constructed using turf(s) or other natural substance. Also whilst what you have written implies natural turf - is that actually the case - because 'turf' could include 'astroturf'.

AstroTurf is not turf it’s plastic.

 

[rulefan]

BTW where do the rules say that a revetted face can only be constructed using turf(s) or other natural substance.

I didn't say that

Also whilst what you have written implies natural turf - is that actually the case - because 'turf' could include 'astroturf'.

Where did you get that? I have mentioned artificial material more than once (see eg #165). "AstroTurf" is a brand of artificial turf made of plastic. It is not turf.
Turf - the surface layer of land on which grass is growing, consisting of the grass and the soil in which its roots grow, or a piece of this that is cut from the ground..

But see this: http://blog.standrews.com/2013/08/15/astroturf-faced-bunkers/

Of course, such a bunker face should be declared to be an Integral Object so that players would not get undue free relief

 

[Jacko_G]

Your in a bunker - deal with it.

Play the shot and move on. That's the simple answer.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Your in a bunker - deal with it.

Play the shot and move on. That's the simple answer.

The point of discussion is that @rulefan is telling me that as the revetted faces of our bunkers are made of astroturf, then unless a LR say otherwise I can take relief from the revetted face as it comprises artifical material and is hence an Immovable Obstruction. That would clearly be nonsense. As we do not have such a rule then if @rulefan is correct then I have to raise this with the club.

 

[rulefan]

The point of discussion is that @rulefan is telling me that as the revetted faces of our bunkers are made of astroturf, then unless a LR say otherwise I can take relief from the revetted face as it comprises artifical material and is hence an Immovable Obstruction. That would clearly be nonsense. As we do not have such a rule then if @rulefan is correct then I have to raise this with the club.

What makes you think that astroturf has been used? It is not cheap and not that common.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

What makes you think that astroturf has been used? It is not cheap and not that common.

Because it has - ecobunker

 

[Jacko_G]

"retaining artificial walls and pilings when located in a penalty are integral objects"

 

[clubchamp98]

The point of discussion is that @rulefan is telling me that as the revetted faces of our bunkers are made of astroturf, then unless a LR say otherwise I can take relief from the revetted face as it comprises artifical material and is hence an Immovable Obstruction. That would clearly be nonsense. As we do not have such a rule then if @rulefan is correct then I have to raise this with the club.

Surely the powers that be at your club would have been made aware of this when the bunkers were first commissioned.
Somebody should have picked this up.

I really can’t see what’s “(eco) about putting a load of plastic in the ground.
It’s for less maintenance as it lasts longer than natural turf.

 

[clubchamp98]

"retaining artificial walls and pilings when located in a penalty are integral objects"

There not in the penalty area ,that is only the sand as far as I am aware.

 

[rulefan]

"retaining artificial walls and pilings when located in a penalty are integral objects"

When did a bunker become a penalty area?

 

[Jacko_G]

When did a bunker become a penalty area?

That's true.

However I still can't see how you can claim relief from the face being made of AstroTurf.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Because it has - ecobunker

Thanks for putting that up @LP...ecobunkers are real...and you can see our Head Greenkeeper putting the rake in the 'club preferred position'

 

[rulefan]

That's true.

However I still can't see how you can claim relief from the face being made of AstroTurf.

Because it is an artificial object (ie immovable obstruction) unless the committee has deemed it to be an integral object.
See rule 16.1c and the definitions

 

[williamalex1]

Thanks for putting that up @LP...ecobunkers are real...and you can see our Head Greenkeeper putting the rake in the 'club preferred position'

I'm a bit confused about relief area from the steps if you're in the bunker, where could you drop in that bunker that's not nearer the hole ?.
Great idea about how to rake a bunker

 

[rulefan]

I'm a bit confused about relief area from the steps if you're in the bunker, where could you drop in that bunker that's not nearer the hole ?.

That's why steps should really be at the side of the bunker.