Unplayable lie. Is it acceptable or frowned upon?

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Well, you raised it so, so I'll answer it.

DMDs are specifically catered or in the Note to 14.3 - allowing Committees to have an LR to allow them - so entirely within The Rules (provided an LR is in place). Definitely not against any rules, nor against the non-existent 'spirit of the rules'.

Well as the 'spirit of the rules' doesn't exist then may I say that (regardless of what any club may declare in a LR) - DMDs are contrary to my definition of 'the spirit of the game'. But let's not go there at the moment as I might ask - are - the spirit of the game and - the spirit of the rules - one and the same thing? Can there be such a thing as 'the spirit of the rules' or should rules be rules or can they be interpreted in 'the spirit of the game'. I think the former as much as I might like the latter to apply.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

2 things
1.the person would not hit a putt into the trees
2 the ball in the OP IS playable.

As I've said before, I know what the rules say I just thinks it's wrong.

I don't think you can make moral judgements about how the rules are interpreted else we get into difficult water. Well of course you can make such judgements but...

I'm implacably opposed to use of technology for measuring distance - I think the rules are wrong. But it appears that I am stuck with them being permitted.

 

[rosecott]

2 the ball in the OP IS playable.

Sez who?

What you fail to take into account is the huge disparity between your skill level and that of the OP.

That is why the player is the sole arbiter of whether the ball is unplayable.

 

[bobmac]

Sez who?

What you fail to take into account is the huge disparity between your skill level and that of the OP.

That is why the player is the sole arbiter of whether the ball is unplayable.

How can a ball in the middle of the fairway be unplayable ?

 

[rosecott]

How can a ball in the middle of the fairway be unplayable ?

The OP was in "some very long, deep rough".

 

[bobmac]

The OP was in "some very long, deep rough".

I was referring to post 45 as well you know from your reply no.59.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Basis of what I am saying (other than that the rules allow it) is that just because a ball is 'playable' in that it is 'hittable' - that does not make playable the shot I wish to play. There are many instances when we declare a ball unplayable because on balance although it is hittable - we can't hit any shot that will do us any good. And many times I am glad that the rule is not about declariung a ball 'unhittable'

I incur a penalty shot and it is then up to me whether or not I manage to take advantage of any potential advantage the rule gives me. I could stll have messed up my second attempt at the 2ft putt. It was still a very fast tricky 2 footer down one nasty slope. If I hadn't watched my first attempt very carefully I'd have been none the wiser and would probably have stuck it to the bottom of the slope again. However I did watch the putt carefully and I was the wiser when I had a second go.

 

[rosecott]

2 things
1.the person would not hit a putt into the trees
2 the ball in the OP IS playable.

As I've said before, I know what the rules say I just thinks it's wrong.

I was referring to post 45 as well you know from your reply no.59.

Crossed wires, I think. I took OP to be the first post in this thread

 

[Imurg]

I'm with Bob on this - the wording is wrong.
For a ball to be grammatically "unplayable" it should be just that - you shouldn't be able play it.
If a ball is clearly in the open with nothing to prevent you getting a club to the ball how can it be grammatically Unplayable?

Change the wording.

What to I don't know but the wrong word is used.

And I also think the putting off the green scenario is wrong. Within the rules but still wrong.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I'm with Bob on this - the wording is wrong.
For a ball to be grammatically "unplayable" it should be just that - you shouldn't be able play it.
If a ball is clearly in the open with nothing to prevent you getting a club to the ball how can it be grammatically Unplayable?

But then you get into the mire of what is and what isn't playable. Ballesteros played shots that you or I would deem unplayable. If my ball is right up against the face of a bunker is it unplayable. It is certainly hittable - but not in a way that most of us would deem likely to result in a positive outcome. And the important words for me there are likely and positive

So I am in the middle of the fairway with a nightmare of a shot having just putted off the green. My ball is certainly hittable - but not in a way that I would deem likely to result in a positive outcome. So I declare it unplayable.

And I also think the putting off the green scenario is wrong. Within the rules but still wrong.

Wrong? - so if I were to play you and I did this, then in your eyes I would be 'cheating' - oh Lord 'cheating' again. Sorry Imurg - doing what I suggest after putting into a bunker is not at all wrong. Not one little bit.

 

[Imurg]

B


Wrong? - so if I were to play you and I did this, then in your eyes I would be 'cheating' - oh Lord 'cheating' again. Sorry Imurg - doing what I suggest after putting into a bunker is not at all wrong. Not one little bit.

Read my post....

Within the Rules are words I used.
Who mentioned cheating?
There's many a rule that many people think is wrong - you don't like GPS but it's within the Rules.

Read posts properly or don't read them at all.

 

[Imurg]

But then you get into the mire of what is and what isn't playable. Ballesteros played shots that you or I would deem unplayable. If my ball is right up against the face of a bunker is it unplayable. It is certainly hittable - but not in a way that most of us would deem likely to result in a positive outcome. And the important words for me there are likely and positive

So I am in the middle of the fairway with a nightmare of a shot having just putted off the green. My ball is certainly hittable - but not in a way that I would deem likely to result in a positive outcome. So I declare it unplayable.

Why does there have to be a positive outcome to a shot?

If your appraoch shot had finished in the place your putt ended up would you declare an unplayable and replay your approach shot?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Why does there have to be a positive outcome to a shot?

If your appraoch shot had finished in the place your putt ended up would you declare an unplayable and replay your approach shot?

Sorry - but if I deliberately do something that someone else thinks is wrong - in my mind he'll be thinking I've cheated eveb although I haven't - and I'd feel bad - and I shouldn't be made to feel bad if I'm doing something that is quite withijhn the rules. - if you wouldn't think I'm stretching the rules to cheating point then great.

And my approach shot quite often ends up where my putt off the green ended up. And yes - with the flag at the front I would think that it is damn near impossible to get my pitch close - and usually I'd be correct.

As far as positive outcomes in golf, is that not what we are looking for from every shot - and from every drop or opportunity to take relief. Golf is a game of uncertainty, skill and luck. With every shot I play I look to play that which has the most likelihood of a successful outcome - and often that will not be the best possible outcome. I certainly try and avoid negative or worse possible outcomes. So I am faced with my difficult pitch back to the green, and if the minimum risk option for me is to take stroke and distance from my difficult situation, then I will take it. Isn't that just playing golf. Nothing wrong with it in my eyes. I'm just using my understanding of the rules to reduce uncertainty around the outcome.

 

[Foxholer]

I'm quite happy to accept that some wouldn't feel happy using a particular rule 'to their advantage' as long as they also don't 'frown on' others who do. That's equivalent to my approach to SLH and his and others use, or not, of DMDs where there's an LR in place.

'Honour, integrity, honesty', which is what R&A use to describe the 'spirit of the game' (which is different from 'spirit of the Rules' in my book) is a personal thing. My attitude to that is that if it is legit in the Rules, then that's fine. There are certain rules/situations where there's an advantage and others that result in possibly too harsh a 'punishment' (imo) but these balance out pretty well and I can see that some rules would be totally impractical to apply without allowing some rare 'advantage' type situations.

I would hope, though, that I would do what Westwood did (simply hitting onto the firway as a recovery) when he returned from a suspended play incident and find his lie had changed from very dodgy to absolutely perfect!

 

[Imurg]

Sorry - but if I deliberately do something that someone else thinks is wrong - in my mind he'll be thinking I've cheated eveb although I haven't - and I'd feel bad - and I shouldn't be made to feel bad if I'm doing something that is quite withijhn the rules. - if you wouldn't think I'm stretching the rules to cheating point then great.

And my approach shot quite often ends up where my putt off the green ended up. And yes - with the flag at the front I would think that it is damn near impossible to get my pitch close - and usually I'd be correct.

As far as positive outcomes in golf, is that not what we are looking for from every shot - and from every drop or opportunity to take relief. Golf is a game of uncertainty, skill and luck. With every shot I play I look to play that which has the most likelihood of a successful outcome - and often that will not be the best possible outcome. I certainly try and avoid negative or worse possible outcomes. So I am faced with my difficult pitch back to the green, and if the minimum risk option for me is to take stroke and distance from my difficult situation, then I will take it. Isn't that just playing golf. Nothing wrong with it in my eyes. I'm just using my understanding of the rules to reduce uncertainty around the outcome.

You feel bad because you think I think you're cheating when you know that I know that you're not........You're like Rory, your head's in the wrong place...

Obviously we all want a positive outcome from every shot, I 'd like every tee shot at a par 3 to go in but Golf ain't like that. There's no guarantee of a positive outcome on a 3 inch putt so why should it be there on a 30 yard pitch, a 150 yard approach or a tght drive on a tricky par 4...?

If you're going to take stroke and distance every time you're faced with a difficult shot you're going to rack up an awful lot of big scores....

 

[MashieNiblick]

Interesting thread.

I think I am right in saying that you do not even have to declare a ball unplayable to exercise your option under Rule 27-1a to put another ball in play under penalty of stroke and distance (i.e from where you played your last shot) and Rule 28 (Ball Unplayable) merely confirms your right to exercise that option if you think your ball is unplayable.

I see where Bob is coming from in that in the circumstances he refers to where this would result in the ball being dropped nearer the hole, there is no "distance" element to the penalty. In fact quite the opposite.

To meet Bob's objections you would have to re-write both rules to include an exception that the stroke and distance option cannot be exercised where the last shot was played from nearer the hole.

I haven't thought through the impications of that in other circumstances. but in relation to the unplayable ball rule that would leave you with the 2 club lengths or drop on a line back from the hole options which I assume Bob would be happier with.

As for "spirit of the Rules" it is specifically referred to in decisions 8-1/26 Player Briefly Changes Caddies for Exchange of Advice and 20-2a/8 Player Drops Ball to Determine Where Original Ball May Roll if Dropped.

"Spirit of the Game" is a separate issue and set out in the Etiquette section and appears in a number of Decisions.

 

[Jay Gee]

FWIW, I think that stroke and distance should not be an option if it puts you nearer the hole. However, the rules are clear and apply equally to everyone. Is that not the primary function of rules, to set out the parameters in which the game must be played?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

...and I'll note that 'distance' in the context of 'stroke and distance' is nothing to do with the 'distance' the ball originally was from the flag - it is to do with distance the ball has travelled as a result of the shot.

As mentioned earlier but lost in the discussion - when I first learnt of what I could do under the rule I was somewhat reticent to take advantage of it. In truth I think it is very rare that I do, and will in future, actually use it - and as Imurg says - use it a lot in a round and you are probably going to rack up an awful lot of high scores - it's not possible to always take full advantage of the potential advantage offered. As with so much of golf it a risk/reward judgement call by the player. Use the rule and fail to take advantage of it and you can look and feel a bit silly.

 

[HawkeyeMS]

...and I'll note that 'distance' in the context of 'stroke and distance' is nothing to do with the 'distance' the ball originally was from the flag - it is to do with distance the ball has travelled as a result of the shot.

As mentioned earlier but lost in the discussion - when I first learnt of what I could do under the rule I was somewhat reticent to take advantage of it. In truth I think it is very rare that I do, and will in future, actually use it - and as Imurg says - use it a lot in a round and you are probably going to rack up an awful lot of high scores - it's not possible to always take full advantage of the potential advantage offered. As with so much of golf it a risk/reward judgement call by the player. Use the rule and fail to take advantage of it and you can look and feel a bit silly.

My tuppence worth is that what you did was perfectly legal within the rules and is actually, quite a clever thing to do in the circumstances.

However, I do think it is wrong that you should be allowed to do it and even though I know it's allowed, in your situation I don't think I could have done it because I could never in my mind accept that I had won a match or made a score by using that rule to my advantage in that way. If I had made a putt and in ran 30 yds of the green, I'd want to use my golfing ability to try to get out of the situation, anything else would not in my mind be in the "spirit of the game". This is however my thinking and in no way am I suggesting you're a cheat or doing anything wrong, just that I personally couldn't accept it of myself.

 

[Region3]

My tuppence worth is that what you did was perfectly legal within the rules and is actually, quite a clever thing to do in the circumstances.

However, I do think it is wrong that you should be allowed to do it and even though I know it's allowed, in your situation I don't think I could have done it because I could never in my mind accept that I had won a match or made a score by using that rule to my advantage in that way. If I had made a putt and in ran 30 yds of the green, I'd want to use my golfing ability to try to get out of the situation, anything else would not in my mind be in the "spirit of the game". This is however my thinking and in no way am I suggesting you're a cheat or doing anything wrong, just that I personally couldn't accept it of myself.

But you would instantly call a penalty on yourself if you moved a twig and the ball rolled back into a depression in the ground, even though your ball is now in a worse position. So on top of receiving a penalty for no gain, you are actually at a disadvantage.

If things like that were covered in 'equity' so that you were not penalised if you gained no advantage, then I'd agree with not taking advantage of the rules when they could benefit you.
I know that's never going to happen because it's too subjective.

This argument actually reminds me of all the 'old school' pool players that think playing a deliberate foul is cheating.