Urban Myth Golf Rules

[MashieNiblick]

Always good to think about where your ball might end up when you drop it. Possible to find a slope and gain the extra advantage as noted by JO (although in my experience so few people know this, you'll need to have a Rule book handy).

Equally, you can drop it so it rolls back into the condition. Do that again and you get to place the ball which can be advantageous.

I think Tour pros are known to make good use of both these opportunities.

 

[DCB]

and it can roll up to 2 club lengths..... so you might end up 3 club lengths away from the NPR by the time you've finished


^
^
^

something people don't seem to know either

Remember though, it can only roll two clublengths from the point it first landed/touched part of the course when dropped.

 

[duncan mackie]

Going back to your explanation - one bit I don't quite get is in bold. I though that when determining NPR you took stance, club and swing that you would have done from where the was ball originally stopped - but from which the player is taking relief. How then can the LH player claim his NPR is not valid on the basis of he would play it RH becuase of the fence - and to do so he would have then to stand on the track. To claim his NPR is not valid on basis of a RH shot surely means he would have to claim he would have been playing RH from the original position on the track? I thought relief and all it entails was based upon what you would have done had you not got relief from where the ball finished up. See what I mean.

you are absolutely correct in what you say, and there would be an NPR to the right for the LH player, where he would have to to take relief initially....

however, he would then be in the position I posted above of switching to a RH swing in the fence situation and would now go through the entire procedure again as a RH player, and end up on the left, establishing his NPR there based on his RH swing consistent with your post.

my mistake for not explaining it more precisely above.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

you are absolutely correct in what you say, and there would be an NPR to the right for the LH player, where he would have to to take relief initially....

however, he would then be in the position I posted above of switching to a RH swing in the fence situation and would now go through the entire procedure again as a RH player, and end up on the left, establishing his NPR there based on his RH swing consistent with your post.

my mistake for not explaining it more precisely above.

Ok then - so this says to me that once the LH player has identfied a NPR then that is new ball position and the stroke he would have played from his position on the track is no longer part of the equation. The LH player is now looking at playing a shot from his NPR and now he can say that the only way he can play a shot (because of the fence) is RH. However as he is still proceding under relief (he hasn't dropped a ball yet to put a ball in play) he can demonstrate that to play the RH shot he has to stand on the track from which he is taking relief and so the NPR is invalid.

Complicated getting there - however - if I've now got this right - or maybe just about got it right - then it's relatively straightforward to apply the same principles to many situations.

 

[duncan mackie]

Ok then - so this says to me that once the LH player has identfied a NPR then that is new ball position and the stroke he would have played from his position on the track is no longer part of the equation. The LH player is now looking at playing a shot from his NPR and now he can say that the only way he can play a shot (because of the fence) is RH. However as he is still proceding under relief (he hasn't dropped a ball yet to put a ball in play) he can demonstrate that to play the RH shot he has to stand on the track from which he is taking relief and so the NPR is invalid.

Complicated getting there - however - if I've now got this right - or maybe just about got it right - then it's relatively straightforward to apply the same principles to many situations.

nearly - he actualy has to drop it. Now he's in a new relief situation from which a RH swing is reasonable and he can either play it or take relief as the track now interfers.

going through the motions is a constent requirement in the rules - knowing it's going to roll into a hazard, more the 2 club lengths, nearer the hole, be in a different relief situation such as CW when dropping from a path etc etc

 

[JustOne]

going through the motions is a constent requirement in the rules - knowing it's going to roll into a hazard, more the 2 club lengths, nearer the hole, be in a different relief situation such as CW when dropping from a path etc etc

[video=youtube;_kKvIly3cA4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kKvIly3cA4[/video]

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

nearly - he actualy has to drop it. Now he's in a new relief situation from which a RH swing is reasonable and he can either play it or take relief as the track now interfers.

going through the motions is a constent requirement in the rules - knowing it's going to roll into a hazard, more the 2 club lengths, nearer the hole, be in a different relief situation such as CW when dropping from a path etc etc

Thanks Duncan. I think your 'going through the motions' is the advice we should all heed. Start with the situation and decide what you can at that point. Take it a step at a time rather than try and work out how to get to what you think should be the final solution. One step at a time. When you do that and keep the steps simple you'll get there. But you have to know the basics.

I missed out the actual drop because I assumed that by taking the drop you were accepting the NPR. But from what you say I can understand how a NPR cannot be judged valid or invalid until the ball has been dropped in accordance with it and it has come to rest. Perhaps obviously not a valid NPR in my scenario without the ball being dropped - but not always going to be obviously the case - so drop then decide validity.

I've found this discussion very useful in helping me think relief situations through (not something I've ever been very good at) - thankyou.

 

[white_feather]

I've heard a few, usually whilst playing matchplay.

Do you think they were trying to mess with my head.

"You can't walk across the green with your bag on you back."

"You can't use your mobile to give you the distance to the pin." (And before you post that's all it does).

 

[JustOne]

You must use a tee on the par 3's (so as not to damage the teeing ground)

 

[cookelad]

You must use a tee on the par 3's (so as not to damage the teeing ground)

That goes with the "you're only allowed to use a putter when on the green" rule that we used to hear as juniors!

 

[duncan mackie]

"You can't use your mobile to give you the distance to the pin." (And before you post that's all it does).

I'll post anyway - I've yet to find one that doesn't have any hardware that wouldn't create a breach, or that can be disabled short of hacking. To keep things brief would you care to 'name that mobile model' rather than risk the thread becoming another DMD disaster zone!

 

[Airlie_Andy]

Here's one for you. My course is relatively young so has large areas of young staked trees that have been grouped together using the blue stakes. These areas are subject to a free drop. Now if a ball is "lost" in one of these areas is it treated as a lost ball or can you claim to be certain it is in this staked area and get a free drop?

 

[duncan mackie]

Here's one for you. My course is relatively young so has large areas of young staked trees that have been grouped together using the blue stakes. These areas are subject to a free drop. Now if a ball is "lost" in one of these areas is it treated as a lost ball or can you claim to be certain it is in this staked area and get a free drop?

don't understand how this relates to 'urban myths'?

possibly better in a thread of it's own in the Rules Section - you can't claim to be certain, it's either 'known or virtually certain' or it isn't (long definition in Rules) which will depend hugely on the way the course is set up in that area.

 

[cookelad]

Here's one for you. My course is relatively young so has large areas of young staked trees that have been grouped together using the blue stakes. These areas are subject to a free drop. Now if a ball is "lost" in one of these areas is it treated as a lost ball or can you claim to be certain it is in this staked area and get a free drop?

I believe the staked area is essentially GUR, so if your ball is lost, but you and your playing partners are virtually certain that the ball went into the staked area you can take free relief from the point the ball crossed the stake line!

may have been a slight edit or two in there!

 

[Airlie_Andy]

don't understand how this relates to 'urban myths'?

possibly better in a thread of it's own in the Rules Section - you can't claim to be certain, it's either 'known or virtually certain' or it isn't (long definition in Rules) which will depend hugely on the way the course is set up in that area.

:rofl: but the 6 pages of discussion about relief close to OOB is fine yeah?

Maybe its my own ignorance on the subject but I was understanding that if you cant find your ball you can't take relief. These areas are very large and were talking about tee shots being lost in them? Maybe I've fallen foul of an urban myth myself

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

:rofl: but the 6 pages of discussion about relief close to OOB is fine yeah?

Maybe its my own ignorance on the subject but I was understanding that if you cant find your ball you can't take relief. These areas are very large and were talking about tee shots being lost in them? Maybe I've fallen foul of an urban myth myself

As I was responsible for the relief close to OOB - I'llapologise - but it was as a result of a 'myth' that goes around my place about where you can and can't drop.

Anyway - back to Urban Myths - not quite Urban but a Lady myth I uncovered and dispelled at my place.

I spotted my lady playing companion had tee'd up slightly in front of the markers. I pointed this out and she apologised profusely - then followed up by telling me how hard she found it to tee up right bang on the line between the markers. Eh? says I - Yes! says she - 'I was told I had to tee the ball between the markers - that's what the ladies do'

Hmmm...

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

...same lady thought that when in the rough she HAD to play to get back on the fairway...

oh dear - she was new to the game - I straightened her out - which was fun in itself

 

[Foxholer]

Maybe its my own ignorance on the subject but I was understanding that if you cant find your ball you can't take relief. These areas are very large and were talking about tee shots being lost in them? Maybe I've fallen foul of an urban myth myself

And to correct the myth in bold.....You don't need to find the ball. You need to 'know or be virtually certain', a term not actually defined - which is not unreasonable for a subjective condition.

Relief would normally be NPR + up to 1 club length. If the ball can't be found NPR is where it (is considered to have) last cross the boundary of the condition.

 

[duncan mackie]

And to correct the myth in bold.....You don't need to find the ball. You need to 'know or be virtually certain', a term not actually defined - which is not unreasonable for a subjective condition.

Relief would normally be NPR + up to 1 club length. If the ball can't be found NPR is where it (is considered to have) last cross the boundary of the condition.

26-1/1
Meaning of "Known or Virtually Certain"

When a ball has been struck towards a water hazard and cannot be found, a player may not assume that his ball is in the water hazard simply because there is a possibility that the ball may be in the water hazard. In order to proceed under Rule 26-1, it must be "known or virtually certain" that the ball is in the water hazard. In the absence of "knowledge or virtual certainty" that it lies in a water hazard, a ball that cannot be found must be considered lost somewhere other than in a water hazard and the player must proceed under Rule 27-1.

When a player's ball cannot be found, "knowledge" may be gained that his ball is in a water hazard in a number of ways. The player or his caddie or other members of his match or group may actually observe the ball disappear into the water hazard. Evidence provided by other reliable witnesses may also establish that the ball is in the water hazard. Such evidence could come from a referee, an observer, spectators or other outside agencies. It is important that all readily accessible information be considered because, for example, the mere fact that a ball has splashed in a water hazard would not always provide "knowledge" that the ball is in the water hazard, as there are instances when a ball may skip out of, and come to rest outside, the hazard.

In the absence of "knowledge" that the ball is in the water hazard, Rule 26-1 requires there to be "virtual certainty" that the player's ball is in the water hazard in order to proceed under this Rule. Unlike "knowledge," "virtual certainty" implies some small degree of doubt about the actual location of a ball that has not been found. However, "virtual certainty" also means that, although the ball has not been found, when all readily available information is considered, the conclusion that there is nowhere that the ball could be except in the water hazard would be justified.

In determining whether "virtual certainty" exists, some of the relevant factors in the area of the water hazard to be considered include topography, turf conditions, grass heights, visibility, weather conditions and the proximity of trees, bushes and abnormal ground conditions.

The same principles would apply for a ball that may have been moved by an outside agency (Rule 18-1) or a ball that has not been found and may be in an obstruction (Rule 24-3) or an abnormal ground condition (Rule 25-1c). (Revised)

 

[Foxholer]

26-1/1
Meaning of "Known or Virtually Certain"

Ha! Looked in Defintions but couldn't find it.

Knew I'd seen it somewhere!

Maybe it's the application of KVC that was being applied to Post 1 of this thread!