Replaying ball if you put into bunker

[rulefan]

True enough. But you stated '(opposite) direction'!

As it is a straight line the direction is towards the other end. The 'space' is between the ends.

 

[chellie]

yandabrown said:
It probably depends more on how you got there as to which option is chosen. Say you had driven it 300 yards into the bunker with a horrible lie and you were rubbish at bunkers shots too, you may choose the 2 shot penalty option (rather than the 1 shot option that takes you back to the tee). Should you have done it from 3 yards behind the bunker, you would likely take the one shot option.

You would still have to drop in a bunker to get the one shot penalty option

You wouldn't though. Knob it three yards into the bunker you can go back the three yards and play your shot again for one penalty shot.

 

[Steven Rules]

You would still have to drop in a bunker to get the one shot penalty option

Options in yandabrown's scenario:
1. Play it as it lies in the bunker. No penalty strokes.
2. Play another stroke from where the previous stroke was played under stroke and distance. (i.e. re-tee it or three yards behind the bunker, depending on the sub-scenario) One penalty stroke.
3. Take either lateral or back on the line unplayable relief and drop in the bunker. One penalty stroke.
4. Take back on the line unplayable relief and drop outside the bunker. Two penalty strokes.

 

[Rlburnside]

I sense - but I could be wrong - that you are overly fixated on the applicabilty of the stroke and distance option to your original bunker scenario as if the only time you can use stroke and distance is when your ball unhappily rolls into a bunker. In this instance you can get out (back to your prevous spot) for a one stroke penalty. As I say, I could be totally misunderstanding your misunderstanding.

Just to be clear - and maybe it is already clear to you - you can take a stroke and distance penalty at any time on the course, anywhere, after any stroke. There is no need for a bunker to be involved.

In this regard, your fixation with asking 'Why would I take a two stroke penalty to get out of a bunker, when I can get out with a one stroke penalty' is fair enough for your specific scenario. But you are comparing a rule designed for anywhere on the course with one specifically and solely relevant to bunkers. I have already explained the circumstances under which the two stroke penalty might be attactive.

Hypothetically, a player is in a tiny little pot bunker with steep, deep sides. The player thinks: 'I can get out of this' and has a go at doing just that but the ball doesn't come out. The player has another go, and the ball stays in the bunker again. The player suddenly realises that maybe he or she doesn't have the skills to get out of this bunker.

Q. Assuming there is no two stroke back on the line outside the bunker option, what can the player do next? A. Nothing except keep trying to hit the ball out of the bunker.....or take a DQ.

Edit. In this scenario the ability to get out of the bunker for a two stroke penalty gets the player out of a big mess and a big hole - literally. In your scenario, the two stroke option is not needed.

Unfortunately we were going round in circles when there was really no need too.

It was very simple question I was asking and the answers from you and others were welcome but it’s the logic of the rules I find wrong.

If you play a shot into a bunker (and it shouldn’t matter how it got into the bunker) imo there shouldn’t be a rule where you can take the ball out in one instance get a one shot penalty and another you get a 2 shot penalty.

The rules seems illogical to me.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Unfortunately we were going round in circles when there was really no need too.

It was very simple question I was asking and the answers from you and others were welcome but it’s the logic of the rules I find wrong.

If you play a shot into a bunker (and it shouldn’t matter how it got into the bunker) imo there shouldn’t be a rule where you can take the ball out in one instance get a one shot penalty and another you get a 2 shot penalty.

The rules seems illogical to me.

What you have missed from your summary is the word ‘distance’. Your one shot penalty does get you out but having gone back to where you played the shot into the bunker you have then again got to cover the ‘distance‘ back to the bunker, or indeed to where your drop under two shot penalty would put you. And the shot you play from the distance could put you back in the bunker…or worse. All very player skills and very scenario specific. The rule simply gives you options and what you choose to do is all about the players approach to course management and risk.

 

[rulefan]

Unfortunately we were going round in circles when there was really no need too.

It was very simple question I was asking and the answers from you and others were welcome but it’s the logic of the rules I find wrong.

If you play a shot into a bunker (and it shouldn’t matter how it got into the bunker) imo there shouldn’t be a rule where you can take the ball out in one instance get a one shot penalty and another you get a 2 shot penalty.

The rules seems illogical to me.

It's because of the probable advantage you may get by having a choice of potentially better places to drop.

 

[Rlburnside]

Options in yandabrown's scenario:
1. Play it as it lies in the bunker. No penalty strokes.
2. Play another stroke from where the previous stroke was played under stroke and distance. (i.e. re-tee it or three yards behind the bunker, depending on the sub-scenario) One penalty stroke.
3. Take either lateral or back on the line unplayable relief and drop in the bunker. One penalty stroke.
4. Take back on the line unplayable relief and drop outside the bunker. Two penalty strokes.

So your saying if I put a ball into a bunker from 3 yards behind it I can replay the shot and add one penalty shot.

Why would anyone take the 2 penalty option. ??‍

 

[Steven Rules]

So your saying if I put a ball into a bunker from 3 yards behind it I can replay the shot and add one penalty shot.

Yes

Why would anyone take the 2 penalty option.

I am not sure who is more frustrated about asking/answering the same question over and over again. You or me. For the shot from three yards behind the bunker you probably wouldn't take the two stroke penalty option.

However, if a player plays a stroke from in the bunker and leaves it in there, the player now has only two options to get it out - hit it out or take the two penalty stroke option and drop it out. There is no longer a one penalty stroke option available to the player that is going to allow the player to drop it out of the bunker in this scenario.

 

[Colin L]

So your saying if I put a ball into a bunker from 3 yards behind it I can replay the shot and add one penalty shot.

Why would anyone take the 2 penalty option. ??‍

In those circumstances it would be a costly mistake to take ball unplayable relief. But if you had wellied a shot into the bunker from 200 yards back and you decided to take relief, you might well choose to take the 2 stroke penalty for unplayable ball relief rather than the risk of going back 200 yards to play under stroke and distance and maybe do the same thing again or make some other mistake. If 200 yards was your maximum distance, the best you would achieve is to be around the same distance from the green in the same number of strokes as you would have been guaranteed with the unplayable relief. You think these things through, do a "risk assessment" and make use of the rules to the best advantage or least disadvantage.

 

[chellie]

So your saying if I put a ball into a bunker from 3 yards behind it I can replay the shot and add one penalty shot.

Why would anyone take the 2 penalty option. ??‍

#42

 

[rulefan]

#42

And now #49

 

[Foxholer]

As it is a straight line the direction is towards the other end. The 'space' is between the ends.

True, maybe. But irrelevant. See post 37!
And given the 'circular' nature of this mini-discussion, I'll stick with my '-ish' agreement!

 

[tobybarker]

You would still have to drop in a bunker to get the one shot penalty option

Not if you were doing so because of water in the bunker (just to add to the complication)

 

[RRidges]

Wow! Just Wow!
The OP's question was answered on Page 1, but still this thread continues!

 

[tobybarker]

Wow! Just Wow!
The OP's question was answered on Page 1, but still this thread continues!

Welcome to the golf forum

 

[Colin L]

Wow! Just Wow!
The OP's question was answered on Page 1, but still this thread continues!

Look at it as a golfing conversation amongst friends. If I'm asked a rules question when we gather in the lounge after a game, folk will get an answer and then the conversation takes off from there with further questions, contradictions, illustrations, anecdotes, stories of top golfers who have transgressed, total irrelevancies from someone who wasn't listening and so on. Sometimes a couple of people stay "on topic" while others move on to something else like last night's football. There's an equivalent in a forum thread for most things that happen in a social conversation. Enjoy the bits that interest you and switch off when it ceases to interest.

This thread is only on Page 3. That's not record-setting by a long, long way.