Tee Marker & OB post

[D-S]

Thought I would ask two questions in one post as, I hope, the answers will be straight forward.

If a GK has placed the tee marker for a set of tees which you are not playing off in your teeing area, does this tee marker become a movable obstruction? So it can be moved out of the way and replaced after the tee shots are played.

If someone has taken an OB stake out of the ground and left it near'ish to its original position (but the exact original position cannot be identified) do you just ignore it and try to estimate where it would/might have been and gauge the OB line from this estimate?

 

[Oops!]

Ad 1) I‘m quite shure to have read that Tee Marker *nerver* are „movable obstructions“, but I can‘t come up with the source, sorry.

Ad 2) I Suppositoriums you‘d would have to call „the authorities“ for them to Place the stake, f. e. In a tournament. On a „normal“ round I‘d suggestiv to accept the situation „as is“, but, here too, I can‘t come up with the source, sorry.

 

[salfordlad]

Thought I would ask two questions in one post as, I hope, the answers will be straight forward.

If a GK has placed the tee marker for a set of tees which you are not playing off in your teeing area, does this tee marker become a movable obstruction? So it can be moved out of the way and replaced after the tee shots are played.

If someone has taken an OB stake out of the ground and left it near'ish to its original position (but the exact original position cannot be identified) do you just ignore it and try to estimate where it would/might have been and gauge the OB line from this estimate?

1. Tee markers that are not part of the exact course you are playing are movable obstructions. But common sense suggests you replace them if you move them.
2. Of course, nobody should be moving an OB stake in the original position but once the damage is discovered I am aware of no precise guidance on this scenario beyond a player should seek help from the Committee/pro shop - course set up is their responsibility. The problem is any answer may be unfair to someone.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

What I would do in the 2nd scenario would be to say that a moved OB post lying randomly on the ground is not part of the course set up, and take my OB line as the straight line between the two posts closest to my ball. Play the course as you find it.

 

[backwoodsman]

1. Tee markers that are not part of the exact course you are playing are movable obstructions. But common sense suggests you replace them if you move them.
2. Of course, nobody should be moving an OB stake in the original position but once the damage is discovered I am aware of no precise guidance on this scenario beyond a player should seek help from the Committee/pro shop - course set up is their responsibility. The problem is any answer may be unfair to someone.

Can you clarify this for me?

My understanding is that the non-movable bit is only applicable to a tee-ing area when starting that hole. At other times it is regarded as the the general area and so they can be moved. Not sure if your comment agrees or disagrees with that?

 

[D-S]

What I would do in the 2nd scenario would be to say that a moved OB post lying randomly on the ground is not part of the course set up, and take my OB line as the straight line between the two posts closest to my ball. Play the course as you find it.

That is fine if the intended OB line is a straight line. However the line missing out a post may well considerably change the intended line if the border is curved, making it a lot further onto the course or vice versa.

If you are merely playing the course as you find it then the post lying on the ground would denote OB.

 

[salfordlad]

Can you clarify this for me?

My understanding is that the non-movable bit is only applicable to a tee-ing area when starting that hole. At other times it is regarded as the the general area and so they can be moved. Not sure if your comment agrees or disagrees with that?

I responded to the OP. OP has the player on their own teeing area starting a hole and there are tee-markers for a course other than their own course in the way. Those other tee-markers, relevant only to a different course, are always movable obstructions.

 

[The Squirrel]

That is fine if the intended OB line is a straight line. However the line missing out a post may well considerably change the intended line if the border is curved, making it a lot further onto the course or vice versa.

If you are merely playing the course as you find it then the post lying on the ground would denote OB.

I assume there's no painted line.

Yeah, I think we can confidently say you ignore a post that has been completely uprooted, moved and left on the ground somewhere, as it could have been left anywhere - applying it in its new position might make the fairway or even the green/hole out of bounds It's also now no longer a post but now just a bit of white wood lying somewhere.

The Rules require you to define the course using Boundary Objects. Given how different these can be in the totality of all golf courses then 2.1 is necessarily vague, and you're clearly meant to do this using your brain rather than be pigheaded to the max (e.g. the course does not now extend to infinity just because a bit of fencing was removed for repair). If it's obvious where the post came from (e.g. there's an exactly post-shape hole where you'd anticipate the post to be by following the general OOB line, with the post a few feet from it) then it seems fairest to play to that -and good etiquette to replace the post if feasible! Similarly if the posts are very obviously following a feature (e.g. they're all 5 yards away from a stream or fence or path) then assuming this still holds seems sensible. Otherwise I think you and PP have to take your best guess based off the existing posts, and if you really can't agree then photo everything and let the committee sort it out later. If they're reasonably close together then it seems fine to follow the existing ones. If they're miles apart or multiple ones are missing such that the boundary is now blatantly wrong or absurd when just taking a line between the remaining posts then you have to define the Boundary using the available objects and your brain as above.

 

[Steven Rules]

1) I‘m quite shure to have read that Tee Marker *nerver* are „movable obstructions“, but I can‘t come up with the source, sorry.

6.2b(4) and, to a lesser extent, 8.1a(1) are probably what you were searching for.

 

[salfordlad]

Ad 1) I‘m quite shure to have read that Tee Marker *nerver* are „movable obstructions“, but I can‘t come up with the source, sorry.

OP is not asking about their own tee-markers but the markers in place for a different course. Those other markers are a movable obstruction.

 

[Backache]

OP is not asking about their own tee-markers but the markers in place for a different course. Those other markers are a movable obstruction.

I assume this is also true for the course you are playing but a different hole? If as is sometimes the case you hit a shot and it ends up next to the tee marker of the next hole that is also a moveable obstruction?

 

[salfordlad]

I assume this is also true for the course you are playing but a different hole? If as is sometimes the case you hit a shot and it ends up next to the tee marker of the next hole that is also a moveable obstruction?

Yes.

 

[Neilds]

Yes

For clarification (for those of us that are a bit slow) can you confirm that, if you are playing the yellow tees (for example),

A. all other colour tee markers are moveable obstructions, as you aren't playing that course?
B. What about other yellow tee markers on other tee boxes, other than the hole you are playing?

 

[salfordlad]

For clarification (for those of us that are a bit slow) can you confirm that, if you are playing the yellow tees (for example),

A. all other colour tee markers are moveable obstructions, as you aren't playing that course?
B. What about other yellow tee markers on other tee boxes, other than the hole you are playing?

If you are playing the yellow tees and are about to hit from (say) the third tee: only the yellow tee markers on the third tee are subject to the restriction explained in Rule 6.2b(4) - that is, do not move them to improve the conditions affecting the stroke. There is no restriction on moving any other tee marker* on the course be they yellow markers on other tees or non-yellows anywhere.
* That is, to enable you to proceed with a stroke that would otherwise have interference. There is, of course, a more general requirement to not take it upon yourself to move tee markers because you disagree with their location - see the third bullet point of 1.2a/1.

 

[Neilds]

If you are playing the yellow tees and are about to hit from (say) the third tee: only the yellow tee markers on the third tee are subject to the restriction explained in Rule 6.2b(4) - that is, do not move them to improve the conditions affecting the stroke. There is no restriction on moving any other tee marker on the course be they yellow markers on other tees or non-yellows anywhere.

Thanks, nice and clear and concise. I was a bit confused about the other yellow tee markers being the "same course".

 

[rulie]

Not sure if a definitive answer has been provided regarding the moved(removed) out of bounds stake? In the pre-2019 Rules and Decisions, there was Decision 33-2a/19, shown below, which describes how the Committee should proceed. The "Mapping Summary", which shows where the pre-2019 Rules and Decisions exist in the post 2019 Rules, says that the outcome of this Decision has not changed and is now in Committee Procedures 2A (although I can't find specific language in that section)

33-2a/19 Boundary Altered by Unauthorized Removal of Boundary Stake

In stroke play, a boundary line has been altered through unauthorized
removal of a boundary stake and, therefore, there is an area (Area X) which
is in bounds if the removed stake is disregarded and out of bounds if the
removed stake is replaced.

Q1 A’s ball comes to rest in Area X. A is aware that the boundary has been
altered. He asks the Committee for a ruling. What is the ruling?

A1. The Committee should replace the removed stake, i.e., restore the
original boundary line and require A to proceed under Rule 27-1, unless
the Committee knows that one or more preceding competitors had, in
ignorance of the fact that a stake has been removed, played from Area X. In
that case, the Committee should allow the altered boundary line to stand for
the remainder of the competition, and A would play his ball as it lay.

Q2.What would be the ruling if the Committee determined that one or
more competitors had, in ignorance of the fact that a stake was missing,
played from Area X and one or more other competitors had treated Area X
as out of bounds and proceeded under Rule 27-1?

A2. If the inconsistent treatment of Area X could significantly affect the
result of the competition, the round should be canceled and replayed.
Otherwise, the round should stand.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

I know the OP said it wasn't clear where the boundary stake was originally located but if it was, would it be OK to replace it under care of the course?

 

[rulie]

I know the OP said it wasn't clear where the boundary stake was originally located but if it was, would it be OK to replace it under care of the course?

When we prepare a course for a competition, we always check the boundaries for complete and thorough definition and paint a white circle around the base of all boundary stakes so that we know the spot to replace them if moved (removing boundary stakes is a penalty btw).

 

[D-S]

When we prepare a course for a competition, we always check the boundaries for complete and thorough definition and paint a white circle around the base of all boundary stakes so that we know the spot to replace them if moved (removing boundary stakes is a penalty btw).

But is it ok to replace them to where they have been moved from? Provided that the correct original position is obvious.

 

[Steven Rules]

There is no specific official guidance on this, aside from what rulie provided at #16.

Personally, as a player in a club conpetition, if it was obvious where the stake belonged, and the stake was nearby, I would probably replace it. Rightly or wrongly.

In an elite tournament, I would expect the player to call for a referee for a determination rather than take unilateral action.