Golf ruling

[rapmarks]

This situation came up in a big tournament at our club.
They added a drop area on a par four this year.
this hole has a small lake in front of tee box and another lake in front of the green. For older ladies, it is hard to hit the tee shot far enough to get over the lake on your second shot. So with the new drop area, you must decide to go for it or lay up.
a lady decided to lay up and the lay up shot went into the pond. She went to the drop area. They never asked for a ruling. When they went in, the pro said that if her intention was to lay up, she could not go to the drop area she had to take the penalty and hit over the pond. I don’t think that is true, I wasn’t there, and no one asked my opinion. It just seems like a made up rule. So what do fellow golfers think

 

[bbodb1]

What one intended to do with a shot is irrelevant.
What kind of hazard is/are the ponds (what color are the stakes) and if there is a local rule, what is the exact wording of the rule?

 

[rapmarks]

What one intended to do with a shot is irrelevant.
What kind of hazard is/are the ponds (what color are the stakes) and if there is a local rule, what is the exact wording of the rule?

That was my thought immediately, since when do we judge by intention. Red stakes around the pondo, which are connected on the far left side by a creek. Never saw any thing in writing about the drop zone

 

[BingoBangoBongo]

I would think she should be able to go to the drop area with a penalty stroke added for going into the pond. Tee shot = 1, layup = 2, shot into water = 3, penalty = 4, another stroke added to take it to the DZ, so she’s hitting 6 from the DZ. (edited to add a stroke for taking ball from fairway to DZ after penalty)

Or you could let her stand there hitting balls into the pond for 15 minutes until she runs out.

 

[rapmarks]

I would think she should be able to go to the drop area with a penalty stroke added for going into the pond. Tee shot = 1, layup = 2, shot into water = 3, penalty = 4, so she’s hitting 5 from the DZ.

Or you could let her stand there hitting balls into the pond for 15 minutes until she runs out.

Prior to the drop area multiple balls in the water happened on several holes in tournaments. A little par 3 right over water with water on right too and big sand trap on left. I have played in tournament with people scoring 15 or 17 on that hole or a couple others. During league play we must pick up but in tournament we play it out.

 

[easyrider]

We stop counting at snowman, 8, but we are not playing tournaments. One thing I can usually count on is if there is water my ball is going swimming.

Bill

 

[BingoBangoBongo]

Even pros can get a 16+ on a hole!

The Highest Single Hole Scores in the History of the PGA

The Highest Single Hole Scores in the History of the PGA. Every golfer has made an embarrassingly high score at some point. Some, such as the late Seve Ballesteros, have taken it with more humor than others. When asked how he four-putted a green during his round, he replied "I miss, I miss, I...

golftips.golfweek.usatoday.com

 

[VacationForever]

I would think she should be able to go to the drop area with a penalty stroke added for going into the pond. Tee shot = 1, layup = 2, shot into water = 3, penalty = 4, another stroke added to take it to the DZ, so she’s hitting 6 from the DZ. (edited to add a stroke for taking ball from fairway to DZ after penalty)

Or you could let her stand there hitting balls into the pond for 15 minutes until she runs out.

I am in agreement that since the lady went straight up to the drop zone, she was already lying 2 when hitting the ball into the water, making it her 3rd shot. I am also in agreement with rest of your counting. It does not matter she wanted to lay up or not. By hitting off the drop zone, she was already lying 2.

 

[bbodb1]

That was my thought immediately, since when do we judge by intention. Red stakes around the pondo, which are connected on the far left side by a creek. Never saw any thing in writing about the drop zone

Okay, then. So red stakes indicate a lateral water hazard and that does provide additional options.
I found this nice illustration online about the options around water hazards:

Rules of Golf - Water Hazards

When you hit your ball into a water hazard, the first thing to do is to notice whether the hazard is marked

www.about-golf.org

Local rules (and competitions) can establish drop zones (usually done to help maintain pace of play) but if drop zones are not defined, then players should use the procedures for dealing with the type of hazard they are in. If not in writing (in the competition rules or course rules), drop zones do not exist.

 

[rapmarks]

i Know hazard rules, I don’t think there are drop zone rules except defined by the local course. Since I have never seen them defined, how can someone not be allowed to go to drop zone when their ball goes into the water hazard ? I should add that being Florida, 16 of the 18 holes have water on them,.

 

[rapmarks]

I am in agreement that since the lady went straight up to the drop zone, she was already lying 2 when hitting the ball into the water, making it her 3rd shot. I am also in agreement with rest of your counting. It does not matter she wanted to lay up or not. By hitting off the drop zone, she was already lying 2.

No her second shot went into the water, she was hitting four off the drop zone. According to pro,she could not go to drop zone and would hit number four shot from behind the pond again.

 

[pedro47]

We stop counting at snowman, 8, but we are not playing tournaments. One thing I can usually count on is if there is water my ball is going swimming.

Bill

I feel she should go to drop zone and play her ball, with a one shot penalty. Some Local tournament rules can be strange and only the local players knows their course rules. LOL.
You should/must count every stroke in tournaments play.

I need to pull out rule book on this subject.

 

[jme]

I've played golf all my life...perhaps enough for 3 lifetimes. I played on my high school team, and on a university team with a full scholarship.
I played in a lot of junior tournaments around the southeast during my teen years, even won a few.

Back in the day, I took lessons from Harvey Penick in Austin TX for two weeks on a special trip by invitation. He was THE famous teacher
of professionals Ben Crenshaw and Tom Kite. I even played with both of them during those two weeks. (Ben & I were 16, Tom was 18.)
They both obviously went on to Hall of Fame careers after having won many PGA tournaments and several majors.
Despite the amazingly fun and rewarding experience, I came home with a sad face, telling my Dad that I needed "to get a real job",
my pro golfing hopes and dreams being dashed by the amazing golf talents I witnessed first-hand.
It was a humbling but educational experience, something I needed!
I was pretty darn good, but nowhere near the level of those two guys.
I decided you cannot simply be good, you must be great. (I've played with a few other touring pros also....one being Larry Mize, a Masters champ.)

With that background, I say that "intentions" have ZERO place in golf ....the rule SHOULD be clearly stated and settled in black and white locally
(many rules are set for an individual golf course, called "local rules" based on that course's layout and hazard locations, etc,
and ALL golf courses have them) that if you hit a particular shot, the consequences or penalty, if any, are followed regardless
of any "subjective" interpretation, or misinterpretation, that can arise which goes against the spirit of the game.

So the situation referenced by the OP is a bogus and erroneous attempt by an ignorant or misinformed local pro to "make up" a stupid rule.
If a precedent is set like that, ANY rule could be turned around in a dishonorable manner
based on a player's saying, "Well, my intention REALLY was to ......blah, blah, blah..."

FORE!!!!!!!!!

 

[rapmarks]

I've played golf all my life...perhaps enough for 3 lifetimes. I played on my high school team, and on a university team with a full scholarship.
I played in a lot of junior tournaments around the southeast during my teen years, even won a few.

Back in the day, I took lessons from Harvey Penick in Austin TX for two weeks on a special trip by invitation. He was THE famous teacher
of professionals Ben Crenshaw and Tom Kite. I even played with both of them during those two weeks. (Ben & I were 16, Tom was 18.)
They both obviously went on to Hall of Fame careers after having won many PGA tournaments and several majors.
Despite the amazingly fun and rewarding experience, I came home with a sad face, telling my Dad that I needed "to get a real job",
my pro golfing hopes and dreams being dashed by the amazing golf talents I witnessed first-hand.
I decided you cannot simply be good, you must be great. (I've played with a few other touring pros also....one being Larry Mize, a Masters champ.)

With that background, I say that "intentions" have ZERO place in golf ....the rule SHOULD be clearly stated and settled in black and white locally
(many rules are set for an individual golf course, called "local rules" based on that course's layout and hazard locations, etc,
and ALL golf courses have them) that if you hit a particular shot, the consequences or penalty, if any, are followed regardless
of any "subjective" interpretation, or misinterpretation, that can arise which goes against the spirit of the game.

So the situation referenced by the OP is a bogus and erroneous attempt by an ignorant or misinformed local pro to "make up" a stupid rule.
If a precedent is set like that, ANY rule could be turned around in a dishonorable manner
based on a player's saying, "Well, my intention REALLY was to ......blah, blah, blah..."

FORE!!!!!!!!!

Me, two comments
we had an old friend, since passed away, who beat Harvey penick in match play in college.
I started playing golf in my fifties, and I played with my husband,a golf coach, and two other golf coaches I sure learned the rules And etiquette, but sadly never was any good.
I have seen many local pros make really bad calls,
but From what I understand, after a three day match point tournament between two teams of 16 players, the pro awarded the trophy to the wrong team. Pictures, hoorays, and much celebration followed. The other team proved to the pro that they had won. That team was later celebrating in the bar, when a member of the losing team came up to the bar, confronted the drop area woman, called her a liar and a cheat, and many other choice words.
if my husband were still able, he would correct the pro in no uncertain terms.

 

[SmithOp]

Ah but there are rules of “intention” in golf, what about when you address the ball, swing and whiff? That counts a stroke as you intended to strike the ball, you can’t call it a practice swing as we have probably all seen amateurs do.

 

[Ubil]

I agree that the players "intentions" should not matter in the application of golf rules, but that does not mean that the rules are completely objective. Some of the rules have the word "reasonable". I remember an instance in a pro tournament where application of the "Temporary Immovable Obstruction" rule turned on the player's intention. It was Sergio Garcia, I believe, who hit a wayward shot behind a temporary grandstand and the ball was still inbounds. The grandstand obstructed his next shot to the green. Ordinarity he would have been given relief and the ball moved to the closest place of relief without penalty. However, one of the exceptions to this rule is that the ball must be "reasonably" playable. The ball could be seen, but it was in a bush. The official on site did not want to grant relief without penalty. Sergio argued that without the grandstand he would have taken on the shot, though it sure looked like it was not "reasonable". The commentators were agreeing with the offical, with the exception of Nick Faldo who said that he would have tried the shot. Eventually Sergio was given relief.

 

[jme]

Ah but there are rules of “intention” in golf, what about when you address the ball, swing and whiff? That counts a stroke as you intended to strike the ball, you can’t call it a practice swing as we have probably all seen amateurs do.

That's a pretty obvious situation (as replays on the tour tell from the way the ball was addressed and the progression of the attempt,
and different in leisure play, but...),
the intent to strike the ball is rather obvious. That is still far different from "what kind of shot a player had in his mind to play",
as described in the initial post by the OP.
No attempt to swing, completely different.

Intent does have a role in golf, but the resulting rule that applies is usually well-defined and applicable, even in the mentioned Sergio Garcia episode.

 

[rapmarks]

That's a pretty obvious situation (as replays on the tour tell from the way the ball was addressed, and different in leisure play, but...),
the intent to strike the ball is rather obvious. That is still far different from "what kind of shot a player had in his mind to play",
as described in the initial post by the OP. No attempt to swing, completely different.

The lady swung at the ball intending to hit if fifty yards however it went sixty yards and rolled into the pond. She proceeded to drop area. Pro said she shouldn’t have gone to drop area.

 

[jme]

The lady swung at the ball intending to hit if fifty yards however it went sixty yards and rolled into the pond. She proceeded to drop area. Pro said she shouldn’t have gone to drop area.

Yes, the rule there is that if it goes into the lake, period, you proceed to the drop area for that particular lake.
That's the correct call, not relevant what she was 'trying to do" in laying up.

Any PGA commentator (or pro player, or official) looking at that would laugh at the local pro's ruling.
I'm pretty sure, or at least I hope, everyone here would agree with that.

 

[Iggyearl]

He might have been a pro from the Bushwick CC. If there was no "designated" drop area, you should play your ball from the point of entry, back to a playable lie. The pro was an amateur in disguise.