Relief from artificial paths......

[Fyldewhite]

Just been on a trip to Dumfries and all paths were declared integral parts of the course in the local rules on the scorecard. Never seen this on a course around the North West but I'm sure I've seen this before north of the border and was wondering if it was common in Scotland? (Silly rule IMHO)

 

[chrisd]

Cant see why the club committee would be happy to see their golfers damage expensive clubs?



Chris

 

[chris661]

Cant see why the club committee would be happy to see their golfers damage expensive clubs?



Chris

Depends on whether they are just grass tracks.

 

[DaveM]

I think if they are hardcore paths. I would agree with my playing partners before the round. If it was just a friendly game, that we pick and drop off paths. Why damage your clubs!!!!

 

[CMAC]

I'm sure I've seen this before north of the border and was wondering if it was common in Scotland? (Silly rule IMHO)

def NOT common in Scotland NOR anywhere else, either its a jobsworth committee or the paths are grass/dirt?

I'm not damaging a £140 new shiny soft metal club for a score- unless they compensate anyone damaging their clubs on their path BECAUSE of THEIR rules?
thought not

 

[rosecott]

Relief from artificially surfaced paths is allowed under the rules - unless they have been declared an integral part of the course. As other posters have said, why would a club introduce such a local rule that gave members the option of a penalty or damage to members' clubs?

 

[cheezburga]

I've come across this a few times here & there. I guess the logic is that you're not supposed to land it on a path - you should be hitting it towards the green stuff & it's your fault? And of course you can move it - under penalty

 

[Fyldewhite]

def NOT common in Scotland NOR anywhere else, either its a jobsworth committee or the paths are grass/dirt?

I'm not damaging a £140 new shiny soft metal club for a score- unless they compensate anyone damaging their clubs on their path BECAUSE of THEIR rules?
thought not

Absolutely agreed. I've only seen this at one other course (not that I've always checked the rules that carefully) and that was in Scotland too so I thought it may be a regional thing. There's no drop off the road hole at St Andrews either I believe. These paths are nearly all of the "stone chipping" type. Ironically stones can be removed in bunkers but apparently they cease to be a danger here if playing off a path an inch deep in them.... barmy.

Card for the course......
http://www.thecounty.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/ScoreCard.pdf .... see 3e, 5 and 6.... very strange.

 

[Leftie]

I've played several courses where paths are deemed integral parts of the course with no free relief. However, if they are "artificially surfaced" then relief can be taken.

 

[CliveW]

However, if they are "artificially surfaced" then relief can be taken.

Which rule applies to that?

 

[palindromicbob]

I've played several courses where paths are deemed integral parts of the course with no free relief. However, if they are "artificially surfaced" then relief can be taken.

Nope sorry but that is wrong. Relief from paths is granted under rule 24-2 Immovable obstructions.

The definition of obstruction:
An "obstruction" is anything artificial, including the artificial surfaces and sides of roads and paths and manufactured ice, except:

a. Objects defining out of bounds, such as walls, fences, stakes and railings;

b. Any part of an immovable artificial object that is out of bounds; and

c. Any construction declared by the Committee to be an integral part of the course.

An obstruction is a movable obstruction if it may be moved without unreasonable effort, without unduly delaying play and without causing damage. Otherwise it is an immovable obstruction.
___________________________________________________________

So when a path (no matter how surfaced) is declared a integral part of the course then relief can not be taken under the rule as it is no longer classed as an obstruction. You can move the stones/woodchip or any loose surfacing material away from the area around the ball as they are still classed as loose impediments. This means you should be able to clear the stones. You can't clear loose impediments in the bunker unless a local rule allows hence the seemingly contradictory rulings.

Even when you can take relief under the rule it is not always practical to do so.

Consider the following for a right handed player. Where the dark green area is bushes and the arrow indicates the direction of play. Where is the nearest point of relief? A,B or C.

ballonpath by worldofbob2001, on Flickr


If you answered B or C you'd be wrong. The nearest point of relief is A. Not really somewhere you'd want to take relief.
B would be the nearest point of relief for a left handed player and C is just a red herring.

This leaves you 2 options. Ball it as it lies or declare it unplayable and take a penalty drop within 2 club lengths.

Video of Phil Mickelson playing off cart path. To take relief would have taken him over to the right giving a bad lie and bad line.

I do agree that declaring paths as integral parts of the course is stupid but that's the rules and we must obey.

If you don't want to play of a path which has been declared an integral part of the course then drop under penalty, resort to having a dinged up club in your bag for playing from paths or use your putter to play off the path without grounding the club to protect it. Better yet, avoid the paths

 

[chris661]

Surely the nearest point of relief for a lefty is still A?

 

[palindromicbob]

Surely the nearest point of relief for a lefty is still A?

Nope. A would result in the path interfering with the stance of a lefty, hence B provides full relief for both the area of swing and stance.

If the ball lay at B then a right handed player can take relief at an are beyond C because the path interferes with stance. Handy to remember in case where a path has rough around it but fairway close by. You could take relief due to interference with stance and drop the ball on the fairway from an area where it may have been in rough. Another example of using the rules to your advantage

 

[chris661]

Don't agree.

 

[palindromicbob]

Don't agree.

Fine by me but why not? Scale in the above pic is hard as I have no representation of stance or area of intended swing.

If the left handed player was taking relief in the direction of A the nearest point of relief would be beyond where A is not at A.

If you don't agree with that then I'm afraid you've been working out the nearest point of relief incorrectly.

This guys explains it much better than I can typing and drawing crap MS paint representations .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2gPHxdg7oQ

 

[Smiffy]

Crowborough Beacons scorecard used to declare that "all roads and paths are integral parts of the course".
Don't know if it still does, but it did during my time there.
My mate used to get well hacked off if he landed on the road that crosses the fifth fairway, and was always looking for free relief.
Tough titty.

 

[MashieNiblick]

I think Palindomicbob is right.

Nearest Point of relief is defined in the Rules as follows

"The "nearest point of relief" is the reference point for taking relief without penalty from interference by an immovable obstruction (Rule 24-2), an abnormal ground condition (Rule 25-1) or a wrong putting green (Rule 25-3).

It is the point on the course nearest to where the ball lies:

(i) that is not nearer the hole, and

(ii) where, if the ball were so positioned, no interference by the condition from which relief is sought would exist for the stroke the player would have made from the original position if the condition were not there.
Note: In order to determine the nearest point of relief accurately, the player should use the club with which he would have made his next stroke if the condition were not there to simulate the address position, direction of play and swing for such a stroke."

The crucial point is that it is the nearest point of relief from the "condition" not the nearest point where you have a good lie or a shot to the green. The rule isn't there to give you a general advantage it is there for a very specific purpose related only to the obstruction, GUR or whatever from which relief is sought.

There are diagrams on the R&A site similar to PBs and they clearly show that the nearest point of relief can be different for left and right handed palyers.

 

[DCB]

Played a few courses where the paths/tracks are integral parts of the course. It may not be that common, but it's certainly not uncommon.

Granny Clark's Wynd probably being the most famous of them.

 

[MashieNiblick]

Getting back to the original question I wonder if there is a bit of a hark back to the early days of golf when you would have played the ball as it lies from anywhere on the links. So it is possible you see it more at the traditional old links courses in Scotland. I think some early iron clubs were designed for playing out of cart tracks and were called "rut irons"

 

[Imurg]

Where a path or road crosses a fairway it just doesn't make sense to declare the path integral. The chances of landing on it are vastly increased compared to, say, a path that goes alongside a fairway - assuming you stay straight of course...!

I'd take the drop - every time, penalty or no penalty!