Relief from Cart Path

Troymcclure

Medal Winner
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
219
Visit site
Am I correct in thinking that "full" relief i.e. feet can't still be on the path is accounted for twice? i.e. both when determining the Reference Point AND when assessing the Relief Area? e.g. reference point taking "full" relief is in the middle of a bush but one angled club length back towards the path lets me drop on grass but with feet on the path. Not permissible right?
 
Am I correct in thinking that "full" relief i.e. feet can't still be on the path is accounted for twice? i.e. both when determining the Reference Point AND when assessing the Relief Area? e.g. reference point taking "full" relief is in the middle of a bush but one angled club length back towards the path lets me drop on grass but with feet on the path. Not permissible right?
Yes, you take the relief serially and if after your unplayable drop the path is a problem you proceed to take relief in the normal way. Remembering the nearest point of relief could be either side of the path so you could end up dropping it back on the bush side.
 
Am I correct in thinking that "full" relief i.e. feet can't still be on the path is accounted for twice? i.e. both when determining the Reference Point AND when assessing the Relief Area? e.g. reference point taking "full" relief is in the middle of a bush but one angled club length back towards the path lets me drop on grass but with feet on the path. Not permissible right?
The nearest point of full relief has to be determined first. The relief area is assessed from that point. If the place you wish to drop will make the ball unplayable in a bush, tough. You will have to take penalty relief for an unplayable ball. That is why you should never lift your ball before you have studied how it might turn out. You may be better off by not taking relief at all.

Edit: Just reread the post above and we seem to have read your question differently.
Are you first wishing to take (unplayable) relief from a ball in a bush or are you first wishing to take free relief from a cart path?
 
Am I correct in thinking that "full" relief i.e. feet can't still be on the path is accounted for twice? i.e. both when determining the Reference Point AND when assessing the Relief Area? e.g. reference point taking "full" relief is in the middle of a bush but one angled club length back towards the path lets me drop on grass but with feet on the path. Not permissible right?
Effectively you are correct.

If your ball is affected by a path, the reference point is the nearest point of full relief - where the path no longer affects ball, stance or swing. That point may or may not happen to be in a bush. The one club length from reference point might get you out of the bush, but its not allowed at a point where if it puts you back in a position where the path again affects the ball, stance or swing
 
Effectively you are correct.

If your ball is affected by a path, the reference point is the nearest point of full relief - where the path no longer affects ball, stance or swing. That point may or may not happen to be in a bush. The one club length from reference point might get you out of the bush, but its not allowed at a point where if it puts you back in a position where the path again affects the ball, stance or swing
So if I drop in the relief area measured relative to the NPR, then if my ball comes to rest in the relief area but at a position that finds my stance back on the path then that was not a valid drop, and I must redrop. Or is it that it is not a valid relief area were my ball to come to rest within it but I would still be standing on the path. Must my relief area be such that anywhere within it provides full relief from the path.
 
So if I drop in the relief area measured relative to the NPR, then if my ball comes to rest in the relief area but at a position that finds my stance back on the path then that was not a valid drop, and I must redrop. Or is it that it is not a valid relief area were my ball to come to rest within it but I would still be standing on the path. Must my relief area be such that anywhere within it provides full relief from the path.
The outcome of your first statement is not possible. The relief area cannot include any area that does not provide relief. While many times the relief area is a complete semi-circle, there are also times when the relief area is less than a semi-circle, constrained by the situation from which relief is being taken (see diagram in Rule 16.1a for an example). A full semi-circle of relief area is not guaranteed by the Rules.
https://www.usga.org/content/usga/h...ons.html#!ruletype=fr&section=rule&rulenum=16
 
Last edited:
To clarify: my scenario doesn’t involve the “unplayable ball” rule, even though I’m going to mention that in this post as an alternative option I had.

My ball came to rest on the right side of the path on the right side of the fairway. To the right of the path is a couple of feet of grass then thick bushes.

The nearest point of full relief/reference point (where my feet would be clear of the path to take my shot) is in the bushes. One club length from there, angling my club accordingly, gets me a drop on the strip of grass. But to play from there I’d have to stand on the path. So I elected to play off the path rather than take an “unplayable” which would have got me back on the fairway side but at the expense of a shot. My friends thought I’d over penalised myself and could have played from the strip of grass.

To add some more colour. It was not feasible to even mark the reference point with a tee as the bushes were too thick but it could be determined, and my driver inserted to ascertain the relief area. Hope that doesn’t cloud the issue?
 
Am I correct in thinking that "full" relief i.e. feet can't still be on the path is accounted for twice? i.e. both when determining the Reference Point AND when assessing the Relief Area? e.g. reference point taking "full" relief is in the middle of a bush but one angled club length back towards the path lets me drop on grass but with feet on the path. Not permissible right?

As answered in post #2, you were correct. You must take complete relief from the condition causing the interference, and so it would not be permissible to play with your feet on the path after the drop. If you did it would result in a general penalty. If you could not take relief because of the bush, your options were, as you knew, to play the ball as it lay or take unplayable ball relief with a penalty. `I hope the shot off the path was successful. You deserved it to be, having thought it through correctly ruleswise.
 
I don't know if any still has access to the old decisions book but there was a useful diagram (24-2b/3.7) covering this (24-2b/3) and similar situations.
Perhaps they could copy it here. or at least 24-2b/3.7.
 
See this video from about 4 minutes in

I also like this one for reminding you to not pick the ball up until you know what you are going to do.

 
The outcome of your first statement is not possible. The relief area cannot include any area that does not provide relief. While many times the relief area is a complete semi-circle, there are also times when the relief area is less than a semi-circle, constrained by the situation from which relief is being taken (see diagram in Rule 16.1a for an example). A full semi-circle of relief area is not guaranteed by the Rules.
https://www.usga.org/content/usga/h...ons.html#!ruletype=fr&section=rule&rulenum=16
Ty. i thought that might be the case and so my second statement ‘..not a valid relief area’ is correct. I wasn’t 100% sure whether or not the actual drop and where the ball ended up were part of ’taking relief’ or whether they were a separate situation. They are part of taking relief.
 
Brilliant. Can you also reproduce the words of 24-2b/3?
24-2b/3
Player Determines Nearest Point of Relief But Physically Unable
to Play Intended Stroke
Q. In proceeding under Rule 24-2b(i) or Rule 25-1b(i), the Definition of
“Nearest Point of Relief” provides that to determine the nearest point of
relief accurately, the player should use the club, address position, direction
of play and swing (right or left-handed) that he would have used to make
his next stroke had the obstruction or condition not been there. What
is the procedure if, having determined the stroke he would have used,
he is unable physically to make such a stroke from, what would appear
to be, the nearest point of relief because either (a) the direction of play
is blocked by a tree, or (b) he is unable to take the backswing for the
intended stroke due to a bush?
A. The point identified is the nearest point of relief. The fact that at this
point the player cannot make the intended stroke due to something other
than the obstruction or condition from which relief is being taken does
not alter this result. The player must drop the ball within one club-length
of the nearest point of relief, not nearer the hole. Once the ball is in play,
the player must then decide what type of stroke he will make. This stroke
may be different from the one he would have made from the ball’s original
position had the obstruction or condition not been there.
 
Right, I have a few issues with Pam at Quail Ridge’s interpretation of the rule but back to my original question for now and I’ve decided my friends were correct and I did over penalise myself.

From 24-2b/3 quoted above “the player should use the club, address position, direction
of play and swing (right or left-handed) that he would have used to make
his next stroke had the obstruction or condition not been there” when determining NPR but “Once the ball is in play,
the player must then decide what type of stroke he will make. This stroke
may be different from the one he would have made from the ball’s original
position had the obstruction or condition not been there.”

So in my case I could have dropped on the strip of grass and stood (clear of the path) close to the ball with an (any) upright club and punched a shot out, right?
 
p.s. I couldn’t have advanced my ball as far as I did hitting from the path this way but the sole of my favourite hybrid would be in better condition :)
 
Right, I have a few issues with Pam at Quail Ridge’s interpretation of the rule but back to my original question for now and I’ve decided my friends were correct and I did over penalise myself.

So in my case I could have dropped on the strip of grass and stood (clear of the path) close to the ball with an (any) upright club and punched a shot out, right?
Absolutely, the no no is continuing to have interference with the next stroke. Providing the next stroke (however it is manufactured) did not have interference, no penalty.
 
24-2b/3
Player Determines Nearest Point of Relief But Physically Unable to Play Intended Stroke
Q. In proceeding under Rule 24-2b(i) or Rule 25-1b(i), the Definition of “Nearest Point of Relief” provides that to determine the nearest point of relief accurately, the player should use the club, address position, direction of play and swing (right or left-handed) that he would have used to make his next stroke had the obstruction or condition not been there. What is the procedure if, having determined the stroke he would have used, he is unable physically to make such a stroke from, what would appear to be, the nearest point of relief because either (a) the direction of play is blocked by a tree, or (b) he is unable to take the backswing for the intended stroke due to a bush?
A. The point identified is the nearest point of relief. The fact that at this point the player cannot make the intended stroke due to something other than the obstruction or condition from which relief is being taken does not alter this result. The player must drop the ball within one club-length of the nearest point of relief, not nearer the hole. Once the ball is in play, the player must then decide what type of stroke he will make. This stroke may be different from the one he would have made from the ball’s original position had the obstruction or condition not been there.
Thanks. Have you got the old decisions as a pdf or do you have a link to an online version?
 
Right, I have a few issues with Pam at Quail Ridge’s interpretation of the rule but back to my original question for now and I’ve decided my friends were correct and I did over penalise myself.

From 24-2b/3 quoted above “the player should use the club, address position, direction
of play and swing (right or left-handed) that he would have used to make
his next stroke had the obstruction or condition not been there” when determining NPR but “Once the ball is in play,
the player must then decide what type of stroke he will make. This stroke
may be different from the one he would have made from the ball’s original
position had the obstruction or condition not been there.”

So in my case I could have dropped on the strip of grass and stood (clear of the path) close to the ball with an (any) upright club and punched a shot out, right?

Rule 24 is from the pre 2019 rule book the current rule number is 16 and can be found here https://www.randa.org/en/rog/2019/pages/the-rules-of-golf.

The problem with what you are proposing is that under the current rule you must determine your reference point using the club and stance you would have used had the path not been there, so your ball when dropped will be in the bush, or am I missing something.
 
Top