Virtually certain

[hairball_89]

Nobody's disagreeing with that.
If the OP said "lost in the rough" I wouldn't have queried it.

Surely the OP paraphrased his mate, knows the rule and we're going round in circles for no reason?

Although, I do think that "that might be in the water. I'll hit a provisional" should be allowed and would save a lot of time!

 

[Foxholer]

Neither of them address it.

Only in your mind!They certainly do in mine! And, I'm certain, in those of the many other posters!

 

[Swango1980]

I don't think I have ever refereed in any (medal play) competition where at least one player hasn't had to be given a lift back by a ref in a buggy because the didn't play a provisional.
The rough at your course must be pretty friendly. If you look a the posts on this and other boards re search times, it would suggest that a lot of time is spent searching for and not finding, balls in the rough.

Hang on, are you suggesting rounds of golf would be quicker if a player hit a provisional EVERY time their ball goes in the rough???? Given that many players hit less than 50% of fairways. If a player hits the rough just off the fairway (and sometimes the length of this rough continues a long way from fairway), then I'd say the ball is UNLIKELY to be lost. Yes, it may well end up being lost, but the same is true sometimes even when a player thinks they hit the fairway.

If you had players hitting provisionals any time they went in rough, you could add on significant amounts of time to a round. Not only that, hitting a provisional does nothing to reduce the time looking for a ball. Furthermore, if you find your first (which was the likelihood), you will then have the player going to search for their provisional(s), which could be all over the place, not to mention the time it takes to actually play those provisional (imagine a 4 ball, all 4 miss the fairway with their first drive, but not my much and the rough not overly long, then all 4 reload for a 2nd time, then maybe a 3rd, etc? Horrendous

If the ball has gone towards thick rough, then yes, certainly worth hitting a provisional. But, a lot of rough at a lot of courses, just off the fairway, is very forgiving and a golf ball can be found easily. There is no chance that I could say there is a realistic chance of a ball being lost if a player hit their ball into it. A remote chance, yes, but nothing more than that.

 

[Swango1980]

I agree the OP is not entirely clear. The player thinks his ball may be in the penalty area (water) or bunker, then they cannot hit a provisional if those are the only 2 options. He also thinks it may be in the rough. Well, it depends on the length of the rough. If the ball is unlikely to be lost in the rough, then he can't play a provisional (because, if not found in rough, it is either in penalty area and he doesn't need to find that, or in the bunker which presumably the player would find). However, if the rough is long, and could be lost in the rough, then the player can hit a provisional.

If the player hits a provisional because ball could be lost in rough, and then doesn't find the ball without any further information, then he has to play on with the provisional. He certainly cannot take a drop by the penalty area, as he cannot be virtually certain it is in the penalty area based on the reasoning he hit the provisional in the first place. However, if a player from the group in front, spectator, referee, etc informs the player that the ball definitely went into the penalty area, than the player becomes virtually certain at that point, and can take a drop by the penalty area, and then be playing his 3rd shot from there.

So, I think the wording of the original post has simply cause the subsequent debate, where assumptions have been made as to whether it was fair to say the ball could be lost outside the penalty area or not.

 

[Swango1980]

Exactly, 100%.

On the basis that this is a Rules discussion, and as we all know the Rules are worded very specifically, it's fair to raise the question of whether the provisional was allowed or not.

Personally I think it would make sense to allow a provisional for any potentially lost ball. During the round yesterday we briefly discussed how bizarre it was spending all those years not being able to tap down the green and getting penalised for hitting the flag, we soon get used to rules improvements.

Is that not currently the case?

The only restriction in not allowing it when ball can only be lost in a penalty area, is that it stops players continually hitting provisionals after duffing their previous shot into a penalty area. Example, player duffs ball into penalty area short of the green, ball likely to be lost. They then hit a provisional. What happens next? Do you allow them to take a drop by the penalty area (as they could have done had they not hit the "provisional)? Do you allow them to play on with the provisional (by assuming first ball is lost)? Ultimately, you'd have to let them choose what they want to do, and so you effectively give them a choice between 2 known outcomes. If they hit a great provisional, they can choose that. If they hit a bad provisional, they have the comfort blanket of being able to take a drop for their original ball.

The rules, correctly in my opinion, avoid this situation by banning the provisional. I've had to stop a player doing this once in a comp. They hit a big hook off the tee on a par 3 at our home course. They then hit a "provisional". When they got down there, they said they'd take a drop by the water as they were sure it went in there. I asked if they were sure on the tee if it had gone in water, they said yes. I said they shouldn't have hit a provisional then, and that had automatically been their ball in play as soon as they played 3 off the tee.

 

[Colin L]

Thanks. I do fully understand that if you think the ball is lost in the rough but subsequently find it, or are told it went in, the water you forget the provisional.

But here is the specific wording of the OP
"Player tees off par 3 and wasn’t sure if ball is in the green side bunker , water hazard or rough so hits a provisional."

As above, he doesn't say anything about thinking the ball might be LOST in the rough, just that it might be in one of 3 locations.
That's my query.

I don't see a question in there.

If I asked a player why he had played a provisional and he said "I thought my ball might have gone into the rough". I'd reply "That's fine then". If, on the other hand, I replied, "Did you think it might be lost?" chances are he would have said, "Of course I did. That's why I played a provisional. What else?" ....... or something less polite.

 

[Colin L]

What does that answer?
I'm asking about the reason for hitting the provisional, 2 of the likely destinations don't allow that.

Only one of the likely destinations doesn't allow a provisional - the penalty area.

 

[Swango1980]

I don't see a question in there.

If I asked a player why he had played a provisional and he said "I thought my ball might have gone into the rough". I'd reply "That's fine then". If, on the other hand, I replied, "Did you think it might be lost?" chances are he would have said, "Of course I did. That's why I played a provisional. What else?" ....... or something less polite.

Our 16th hole has a bunker short and left of the green, light rough to the left of the green and then a penalty area further left, out of site from the tee. Now, a player tees off, sees their ball hooking, but can't see it land due to a bit of sun (or poor eye site). It definitely bounced around the bunker, going left. So, they think it could be in the bunker, or it could have hopped over and be in the rough, or might have hopped further and gone into the penalty area.

The player says they will hit a provisional. Do you allow them? Bearing in mind, there is next to zero chance they will lose the ball in the bunker or in the rough, which is not much longer than the fairway.

 

[anotherdouble]

The OP didn’t say but perhaps there is a local rule in Place allowing a provisional to be taken if the think it went into a penalty area

 

[Colin L]

Our 16th hole has a bunker short and left of the green, light rough to the left of the green and then a penalty area further left, out of site from the tee. Now, a player tees off, sees their ball hooking, but can't see it land due to a bit of sun (or poor eye site). It definitely bounced around the bunker, going left. So, they think it could be in the bunker, or it could have hopped over and be in the rough, or might have hopped further and gone into the penalty area.

The player says they will hit a provisional. Do you allow them? Bearing in mind, there is next to zero chance they will lose the ball in the bunker or in the rough, which is not much longer than the fairway.

Yes. A supposedly "next to zero chance" is nonetheless a possibility.

By the way, I spent about 5 minutes on my rules course having to do a demo of overseeing a player searching for his ball in a bunker. I guess the tutors recognised the possibility of its happening or they wouldn't have taken up course time on it.

I just don't get Traminator's difficulty. The player thought his ball might be in the rough and plays a provisional. if I see a player knock a shot into even light rough and playing a provisional I wouldn't even think of questioning it. It's just what he should do if in doubt. I watched 3 players having to go back to the tee in a tournament last week after "going into the rough". Now if I had been nearer, I might well have had a quiet word about playing a provisional the next time.

 

[Colin L]

It's a bit daft accusing someone of "difficulty" during a discussion on the rules of golf, there are countless situations on here that have been discussed, and as I previously noted, a lot of that is due to the very specific wording.

I have made my point very clearly, perhaps you are being difficult by refusing to acknowledge the clear, subtle difference I have highlighted?

For goodness sake. Referring to someone's apparent difficulty with a situation is not in any way an accusation. I have difficulty in seeing what you find difficult. That's all.

 

[Swango1980]

Yes. A supposedly "next to zero chance" is nonetheless a possibility.

By the way, I spent about 5 minutes on my rules course having to do a demo of overseeing a player searching for his ball in a bunker. I guess the tutors recognised the possibility of its happening or they wouldn't have taken up course time on it.

I just don't get Traminator's difficulty. The player thought his ball might be in the rough and plays a provisional. if I see a player knock a shot into even light rough and playing a provisional I wouldn't even think of questioning it. It's just what he should do if in doubt. I watched 3 players having to go back to the tee in a tournament last week after "going into the rough". Now if I had been nearer, I might well have had a quiet word about playing a provisional the next time.

I apologise, but I have to completely disagree

I have seen players hit drives towards middle of fairway, and then we can't find it. Rare, but this sometimes happens (not zero, but next to zero probability).

If a player can simply say they think their ball might be lost, then they can basically play a provisional ball any time they wish if it cannot be seen as it lays from where they played it. That is ridiculous.

In my example, you allow a player to play the provisional on my 16th hole. Their original cannot be found. Presumably you will say they cannot assume their ball is in penalty area (unless found there), because they thought it could be lost in rough. It would be laughable to anyone to think the ball could be lost in the rough, given it is that short (if they were new to the course, that would be justification as they'd have no idea what is round the corner, but not to a club member).

But, if a provisional can honestly be played in this situation, it is a clear example of ridiculous rules. What would stop any player basically hitting a provsional anytime they cannot physically see where their ball came to rest. In the bunker, hit a provisional. Blind fairway, hit a provisional. Trickles towards the light rough to the edge of the fairway, hit a provisional. And, who could stop them, given they can say there may be a 0.000000001% chance they don't find their ball?

 

[chrisd]

I always thought that a player could play a provisional at any time there was a possibility (however low) of the ball being lost, but, if it was clear that the ball would not be lost that would be a penalty

 

[Swango1980]

I always thought that a player could play a provisional at any time there was a possibility (however low) of the ball being lost, but, if it was clear that the ball would not be lost that would be a penalty

I certainly agree, a provisional can be played if the player thinks it could be lost. However, the standard by which a player can believe a ball is lost seems much much lower than I expected. Basically, it seems, if it is not visible when it comes to rest, from where the player took the shot from, then they can seemingly hit a provisional any time they wish on the extremely remote chance they do not find it (unless you have spotters who wave back to say it is OK).

I'd love to see a player take the mick out of this rule a bit in a high profile event, by playing a provisional every single time they cannot see their ball at rest. It would be interesting to run an experiment in a club comp. Instruct every player in the competition to hit a provisional when their ball is not visible from where they played the shot. Then see if the rounds last any longer than normal. Do it in a medal for extra spice. And, they say the whole point in a provisional ball is to save time....

 

[chrisd]

I certainly agree, a provisional can be played if the player thinks it could be lost. However, the standard by which a player can believe a ball is lost seems much much lower than I expected. Basically, it seems, if it is not visible when it comes to rest, from where the player took the shot from, then they can seemingly hit a provisional any time they wish on the extremely remote chance they do not find it (unless you have spotters who wave back to say it is OK).

I'd love to see a player take the mick out of this rule a bit in a high profile event, by playing a provisional every single time they cannot see their ball at rest. It would be interesting to run an experiment in a club comp. Instruct every player in the competition to hit a provisional when their ball is not visible from where they played the shot. Then see if the rounds last any longer than normal. Do it in a medal for extra spice. And, they say the whole point in a provisional ball is to save time....

I don't agree, I believe the rule works quite well. I'd like to see a few more provisionals being played given that 3 minutes is not long to look for a ball and it certainly speeds up play. I haven't ever played in a game where anyone has played a provisional that was totally unnecessary

 

[Swango1980]

I don't agree, I believe the rule works quite well. I'd like to see a few more provisionals being played given that 3 minutes is not long to look for a ball and it certainly speeds up play. I haven't ever played in a game where anyone has played a provisional that was totally unnecessary

I agree than virtually all golfers play the rule in the right spirit. Never seen anyone take the piss, so it does work fine.

However, if the criteria is simply that the ball may be lost, even when the odds are ridiculously low, then it certainly doesn't stop anyone taking the piss to some extent.

We only really have one blind tee shot at my course. But, in a medal, even if I smash a ball down the middle, how can I be sure my ball hasn't fallen down a strange hole, or something else happened to it. There is always a chance it won't be found because something truly bizarre has happened. Technically, I could hit an infinite number of provisional, because there will always be a 0.01% chance O won't find it.

In my example earlier about our 16th, it looks like it can't be said the player can't hit a provisional. Problem is, they hit a provisional, hole it or stick it to within a few inches, they'll just claim their original is lost if indeed it can't be found and then almost certainly within penalty area. But, if they hit an awful provisional, can't find their original, they may say they are virtually certain it went in penalty area. I'd agree with them, as it definitely isn't lost in light rough or in bunker, but they hit their provisional thinking itmay be lost outside penalty area. So, I'd have to say that, as no more info has come to light, they can't assume it is penalty area and might be lost in rough. A complete farce of a situation

 

[robinthehood]

I agree with @chrisd not enough people are playing provisionals and I've never seen anyone take the piss.

 

[Colin L]

I certainly agree, a provisional can be played if the player thinks it could be lost. However, the standard by which a player can believe a ball is lost seems much much lower than I expected. Basically, it seems, if it is not visible when it comes to rest, from where the player took the shot from, then they can seemingly hit a provisional any time they wish on the extremely remote chance they do not find it (unless you have spotters who wave back to say it is OK).

I'd love to see a player take the mick out of this rule a bit in a high profile event, by playing a provisional every single time they cannot see their ball at rest. It would be interesting to run an experiment in a club comp. Instruct every player in the competition to hit a provisional when their ball is not visible from where they played the shot. Then see if the rounds last any longer than normal. Do it in a medal for extra spice. And, they say the whole point in a provisional ball is to save time....

We are getting further and further into a fantasy world. Have you ever heard of player in a high profile event doing such a thing or truly think it could happen? If anyone tried it on like that, the other players would probably sort him out and failing that a referee would but let's confine ourselves to the real golfing world we inhabit. Players decide when they think their ball might be lost without any criteria set out to guide them. I've never heard of a player deliberately playing multiple provisionals for no good reason, and why would they? There is nothing to be gained from it. What we could find is plenty of evidence of the real nuisance - players not playing provisionals when they arguably should have and taking up time going back to wherever to play their next shot. That's the real world.

 

[Swango1980]

We are getting further and further into a fantasy world. Have you ever heard of player in a high profile event doing such a thing or truly think it could happen? If anyone tried it on like that, the other players would probably sort him out and failing that a referee would but let's confine ourselves to the real golfing world we inhabit. Players decide when they think their ball might be lost without any criteria set out to guide them. I've never heard of a player deliberately playing multiple provisionals for no good reason, and why would they? There is nothing to be gained from it. What we could find is plenty of evidence of the real nuisance - players not playing provisionals when they arguably should have and taking up time going back to wherever to play their next shot. That's the real world.

I'm sorry, but this stemmed from Traminator's very reasonable question about getting more information on the rough. People immediately jumped down his throat, insinuating it was completely reasonable to play a provisional regardless. It was explained the player is entitled to do this, regardless of how remote the chances are ball is lost.

Have I seen it in high profile event? Of course not, they have spotters, fans and referees who give them immediate feedback. And if not, their reputation would be immediately tarnished by fans if they took the mick. Players do not do it in regular amateur golf. Mainly because most are aware their ball.is incredibly unlikely to be lost. But, I always felt if a player did take the mick, common sense from a ref could judge the player is being reasonable or not.

However, if your interpretation is correct, then basically a player can take many provisional, and be covered by the rules. My "fantasy" scenarios are nothing of the sort. Given one was a scenario that can happen time and time again on our 16th hole, your interpretation basically allows a player to hit a provisional when they pull it left, even though it is almost certain if it is not found, it is in penalty area (way beyond 95% certain)

I apologise for my animated response, don't wanna shoot the messenger. It is just my surprise to how the rule can be interpreted.

 

[Colin L]

"even though it is almost certain if it is not found, it is in penalty area (way beyond 95% certain)"

If it is way beyond 95% certain it is virtually certain and you cannot play a provisional but must take relief from the penalty area. If he plays what he believes to be a provisional ball, he has played under stroke and distance