Ruling needed

[rosecott]

Player has a horrible tee shot which just goes off the front of the tee into heavy rough. He plays a provisional which does exactly the same. There is no sign of the original ball after a brief search so he elects to play the provisional which has been identified. He strikes down steeply and sharply to ensure that the ball will come out of the rough lie. The first contact he makes is with the original ball which had been lodged unnoticed under the provisional.

How to proceed?

 

[fundy]

Player has a horrible tee shot which just goes off the front of the tee into heavy rough. He plays a provisional which does exactly the same. There is no sign of the original ball after a brief search so he elects to play the provisional which has been identified. He strikes down steeply and sharply to ensure that the ball will come out of the rough lie. The first contact he makes is with the original ball which had been lodged unnoticed under the provisional.

How to proceed?

unless its a medal tell him to pick up and concede/blob the hole if its a medal ill leave it to the rulies

 

[Colin L]

I'd say it's no different from hitting a stray ball underneath your own. His intention was to hit his provisional ball, and so he has not made a stroke at the original which has not been found or identified. No penalty and carry on with the provisional.

 

[patricks148]

Player has a horrible tee shot which just goes off the front of the tee into heavy rough. He plays a provisional which does exactly the same. There is no sign of the original ball after a brief search so he elects to play the provisional which has been identified. He strikes down steeply and sharply to ensure that the ball will come out of the rough lie. The first contact he makes is with the original ball which had been lodged unnoticed under the provisional.

How to proceed?

2 shot penaulty for practicing on the course

 

[Swango1980]

Good question. The player didn't find their original ball. They decided to play on with their provisional. Now presumably, they played the provisional ball from a spot estimated to be the same distance from where the original ball was. So, Rule 18.3c tells us that the provisional ball may keep it's status of provisional at this point.

However, given that both balls were in the same area, presumably the 3 minute search time is over for the original ball. Therefore, it becomes LOST. The provisional becomes the ball in play, and so it doesn't matter that the original magically appeared when the shot was played. It is still lost, but at least the player got it back.

If the 3 minutes wasn't up, and the player, for whatever reason, just decided to get on with it and play the provisional without having their 3 minutes, then I suspect that means they've found their original, and the provisional can be abandoned (and original replaced). To be fair, I've not devoured all the rules, so happy to be told otherwise. But, this is my first instinct.

 

[ManinBlack]

Good question. The player didn't find their original ball. They decided to play on with their provisional. Now presumably, they played the provisional ball from a spot estimated to be the same distance from where the original ball was. So, Rule 18.3c tells us that the provisional ball may keep it's status of provisional at this point.

However, given that both balls were in the same area, presumably the 3 minute search time is over for the original ball. Therefore, it becomes LOST. The provisional becomes the ball in play, and so it doesn't matter that the original magically appeared when the shot was played. It is still lost, but at least the player got it back.

If the 3 minutes wasn't up, and the player, for whatever reason, just decided to get on with it and play the provisional without having their 3 minutes, then I suspect that means they've found their original, and the provisional can be abandoned (and original replaced). To be fair, I've not devoured all the rules, so happy to be told otherwise. But, this is my first instinct.

Wrong!

 

[Swango1980]

Wrong!

Fine. But what is the right answer, I think the OP would be interested?

 

[duncan mackie]

Seriously facinating question!

I agree with Colin that the stroke at the provisional is valid and without penalty.

I agree with Swango that the next question revolves around the status of the original ball - which is a factual one; it is either lost or it isn't.

Then the really interesting bit...if it isn't lost is there a penalty for accidentially causing it to move? (The stroke at the provisional is not part of an active search for the original ball as far as I can see).

Great question.

 

[duncan mackie]

Wrong!

Clarification would be appreciated. ..which bit do you think is wrong?

 

[rulie]

Seriously facinating question!

I agree with Colin that the stroke at the provisional is valid and without penalty.

I agree with Swango that the next question revolves around the status of the original ball - which is a factual one; it is either lost or it isn't.

Then the really interesting bit...if it isn't lost is there a penalty for accidentially causing it to move? (The stroke at the provisional is not part of an active search for the original ball as far as I can see).

Great question.

No penalty in my opinion - same as hitting a provisional ball from behind where the original is likely to be and that moving provisional ball accidentally strikes and moves the original ball, which location was not known at the time the provisional ball was played.
As to the original question, it would be a question of fact whether the search time for the original had expired and thus lost and also a question of fact whether the provisional ball was nearer the hole than the original ball if the search time had not expired - two facts not included in the original post.

 

[duncan mackie]

No penalty in my opinion - same as hitting a provisional ball from behind where the original is likely to be and that moving provisional ball accidentally strikes and moves the original ball, which location was not known at the time the provisional ball was played.
As to the original question, it would be a question of fact whether the search time for the original had expired and thus lost and also a question of fact whether the provisional ball was nearer the hole than the original ball if the search time had not expired - two facts not included in the original post.

I agree with your interpretation, but was struggling to find anything helpful in 9.4 - answer seems to be to look wider!

 

[Swango1980]

Yeah. Also, one other thing, it doesn't need to be a question of fact about whether provisional is nearer or further than original ball, when deciding if it loses its status or not. The rules just say this needs to be estimated. So, if it is estimated that it is at least the same distance as original, I don't believe it loses its status as provisional if it then turns out the original is found in time and turns out to he further away.

 

[duncan mackie]

Yeah. Also, one other thing, it doesn't need to be a question of fact about whether provisional is nearer or further than original ball, when deciding if it loses its status or not. The rules just say this needs to be estimated. So, if it is estimated that it is at least the same distance as original, I don't believe it loses its status as provisional if it then turns out the original is found in time and turns out to he further away.

It is a question of fact as to whether the original ball is lost, or not.

Don't think anyone has referenced estimates at all!

 

[Swango1980]

I agree with that. I was just referencing the final point in Rulie's analysis. In other words, if you play provisional and then find original within the 3 minutes, the original doesn't become lost if it turned out your provisional was actually closer to the hole. Because, before you played the provisional, you had estimated it was the same distance or further from hole than original.

Minor point only, albeit it could become a factor if it was to ever actually happen.

 

[duncan mackie]

I agree with that. I was just referencing the final point in Rulie's analysis. In other words, if you play provisional and then find original within the 3 minutes, the original doesn't become lost if it turned out your provisional was actually closer to the hole. Because, before you played the provisional, you had estimated it was the same distance or further from hole than original.

Minor point only, albeit it could become a factor if it was to ever actually happen.

Fair point - I had missed his use of those words and agree that the second element was poorly worded (unusually for him!)

It is a question of fact as to whether the provisional ball was played from a position ahead of the estimated position of the original ball...


🤗

 

[rulefan]

Then the really interesting bit...if it isn't lost is there a penalty for accidentially causing it to move?

Give the definition specifies the ball as opposed to a ball, I think not.

 

[duncan mackie]

Give the definition specifies the ball as opposed to a ball, I think not.

Another good example of where the clarity of such wordings risks stumbling when it meets the involvement of a (the) provisional ball!
I think we can agree on the intention of the rules in such a situation, but a 5th exemption under 9 4 b would be helpful

 

[Swango1980]

Seriously facinating question!

I agree with Colin that the stroke at the provisional is valid and without penalty.

I agree with Swango that the next question revolves around the status of the original ball - which is a factual one; it is either lost or it isn't.

Then the really interesting bit...if it isn't lost is there a penalty for accidentially causing it to move? (The stroke at the provisional is not part of an active search for the original ball as far as I can see).

Great question.

Been thinking about your last question, and the wording of Rule 9.4b and exceptions. In 9.4b, the "Causing It to Move" statement would apply. The Exception 2 almost got us out of a penalty situation, if it wasn't for the fact that it finished with "while trying to find or identify it". So, as it would stand, if the original ball wasn't lost when the provisional ball was played, then the original ball is found. It must be replaced but the player gets a one stroke penalty for causing it to move. The provisional is abandoned.

This would have gone against my instinct, which initially would have thought that it wasn't specifically covered in rules, so in equity the original could be replaced without penalty (by the way, where did that rule go, it used to be part of Rule 1?). So, perhaps if it is not intended for a penalty to be applied under the Rules, Exception 2 could be reworded?

 

[Juan Quidonqui]

I think the correct answer can be found in the Rules of Golf at 25.1 which states that the player should pick up both balls, go back to the tee, continue past the tee, off the course and back to the pro shop and get some lessons as soon as possible.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

I think I'd go for a drink. If the Gods are that much against you, to give you a scenarios like that, then you've got no hope for a good game that day😁

Mind you, you are "accurate"😀