mikejohnchapman
Challenge Tour Pro
So you can't designate a temporary green as a NPZ?
Staked tree
- Thread starter Jakob Schrik
- Start date
rulefan
Tour Winner
Why would you want to? A ball cannot be played from a temporary green under the rules anyway.
williamalex1
Money List Winner
Looking at the OP drawing the ball is a laying a foot to the right of the tree, why isn't the NPR just another 1 foot to the right ?.
The NPR to the left would need to be at least 1 foot 1 inch
??????
The NPR to the left would need to be at least 1 foot 1 inch
??????
Last edited:
rulie
Head Pro
By the time this thread concludes, the tree will be grown and the stake removed.
Swango1980
Well-known member
Nightmare for us then. On one par 3, the temp green runs all the way the front of the main green and all the way in front of the left bunker. So, on normal play if a player ends up anywhere just front of the green, I guess that requires a drop about 20 yards away, turning a putt into a trickier pitch.
rulefan
Tour Winner
Exactly the same as making it a NPZ.
Edit: Just realised that you didn't ask the question
DickInShorts
Newbie
Probably the most broken rule when winter greens are marked up - both when either summer or winter greens are in play I see many that think it’s ok to putt from a wrong green
Colin L
Tour Winner
Sadly I sometimes see a rather large fresh divot hole on a temporary green which shows poor control of a putter.
williamalex1
Money List Winner
Any reason
Looking at the OP drawing the ball is a laying a foot to the right of the tree, why isn't the NPR just another 1 foot to the right ?.
The NPR to the left would need to be at least 1 foot 1 inch
rulefan
Tour Winner
The accuracy of the drawing?
williamalex1
Money List Winner
It states the ball is a foot to the right
mikejohnchapman
Challenge Tour Pro
Was really my point - if they were marked as NPZ it would encourage people to play by the rules.
rosecott
Money List Winner
So, Billy. The ball is a foot to the right of the staked tree. You take your stance round about where the ball lies and mark the point where the ball would lie if you were to play a stroke without interference from the staked tree. If that point is further away from where the ball lies than the point to the left which has no interference then it is not the Nearest Point of Relief.
That applies if you are right-handed as I know you are.
rulefan
Tour Winner
Wouldn't it be better to encourage them to play by the actual rule by making it known that playing from a wrong green is not permitted.
Inventing rules does nothing for education.
jim8flog
Journeyman Pro
On our last card we had it on the back of the card about temp/main greens being wrong greens as appropriate. It still did not stop some players from playing off them when they should not have.
One temp green got ruined by somebody who decided it gave them a really nice area of flat grass to practice from.
rulie
Head Pro
That's not a Rules of golf issue, that's a club education and discipline issue.
jim8flog
Journeyman Pro
The question comes would the player have done it had they actually read the rules?
rulie
Head Pro
You were talking about practicing - do players read the Local Rules when they go out to practice? (not likely, since they rarely read them when they go out to play.) Do you have club rules about practicing?
One of our tournament officials often refers to the Notice to Players (Local Rules for the event) as the DNR, meaning Do Not Read or Did Not Read, a la Dustin Johnson at Whistling Straits.
jim8flog
Journeyman Pro
Yes but such a player is unlikely to have read that either or think it does not apply to them.
Yet to prove it but I am sure that one player in certain does think the rules re practice apply to him because he is too good a player. I had a real set to with his dad once over what they were doing on the course when he was a junior. So habits started and condoned by his dad have probably continued.
RulesGuy
Member
E-10 is crystal clear and makes no mention of Abnormal Course Condition (GUR). This is in contrast to the model rule E-8.1 where the words 'Abnormal Course Condition ' are contained within the rule itself. It would appear therefore that the powers that be are deliberately distinguishing staked trees from other NPZ's. If this were not the case they would have clarified (as they have in E-8.1) that the area is to be treated as an abnormal Course Condition. IMHO E-10 is a free standing local rule and can be used without any mention of GUR. I say this accepting the definition but believing the R&A would not have produced this specific local rule without reference to ACC had they not meant for it to be used as it is.
