Is Anybody out there?!
in [Golf in UK]
|
Prev: umut thermal health farm
Next: Terriible weather
From: John van der Pflum on 6 Jan 2010 19:51 On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 17:32:17 +0100, Paul Schmitz-Josten <alossola(a)web.de> wrote: >John van der Pflum in <8jn4k5tr3es2pkp6pt2i4nclrnbaiqtjff(a)4ax.com>: > >>>Hopefully open by the 24th for 3 clubs and a putter. >>> >>>So a question to all.. >>>Which clubs would you take? >> >>I'd probably go with a hybrid, 6 iron, and 9 iron. >> >>IMO, it's too bad they let you have three clubs plus a putter. It >>would be more fun if you had only three clubs. > >That's how it's usually done here in a "Portugese" tournament. >For that, I'd like to take the hybrid, 6 + 9 irons (and declare the hybrid >(<http://valueguide.pga.com/images/Sonartec/woods/md_large.jpg>) >to be the putter ;-> ) > >For a private fun tournament on winter greens we once sent our friends out >in pairs (best ball scoring) with one club each and the allowance to share >these two clubs between them. That was good fun - we even had two >lefthanders to build a team ;-> That's exactly what I did. Three of us took a brake from the "big" courses when we were in St. Andrews and played a three club match at the Strathyrum (pretty sure I butchered that spelling). I took the hybrid, a 7I, and a 52* wedge. I putted with the hybrid as well as I do with my regular putter! :-) -- jvdp Hey Annika, you'll never hold these: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rockpyle/3940732311/ http://www.rsgcincinnati.com
From: Peter Strauss on 6 Jan 2010 20:50 JPW wrote: > Peter, > > As I have suspected for some time, the group appears to be no more. > There is only you and I to discuss what may be nothing at all. Below > are my thoughts on one part of 27-2. Give it some thought and if you > consider it worth commenting upon then I would be pleased to hear from > you. > > On page 17 of the �bible� it is stated � The Rule book is written in > a VERY precise and deliberate fashion. You should be aware of and > understand etc�� > > The second point is a phrase that is entirely superfluous�.�makes a > stroke with the provisional ball FROM the place where the original > ball is likely to be�. This is assuming that the provisional ball has > been hit to exactly the same place as the original. How often can any > player hit two consecutive shots which are so identical to be hit to > the very same place? It is not possible because if it happened then > the two balls would be lying literally one on top of the other. > > Just interpreting the rule as written in a VERY precise and deliberate > fashion. Yeah, that's really gnarly. > > We had three weeks just south of Bradenton just before Christmas, > Peter. Temperatures no lower than 89 degrees. Oh for a touch of that > just now. Very nice! It hasn't been above 50-52 here for a long time. don't know when I'm going out next. Looking at next week, but have to check the long-range forecast. I don't do rain :-) Peter
From: JohnT on 7 Jan 2010 08:41 On Jan 5, 10:56 am, JPW <pat.jp...(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > Some time since I have posted but a Happy New Year to all of you out > there. Would I rather be here under a foot of snow or out there with > Peter in Sunny California? What a silly question. But I suppose that > John has a lot more snow than we here, in Canada! > > Just to make some kind of talking point I've had a long e-mail > discussion with a friend about Provisional balls. Perhaps those who > feel inclined would like to give their tuppennyworth. The question > that I put to you is very simple. "When does the provisional ball > become the ball in play? " Forget the five minutes for that is not the > point under inspection; rather read 27-2 as it stands and put your own > words to interpret what you see there. Does anyone see anything > problematical there? > > I'll look back here again tomorrow. Off to clear the drive again. > > JPW Hi Pat, Happy New Year to you and everyone else in the group. Here in Bayfield, it started snowing on New Year's Eve and it didn't stop until Monday lunchtime. During that period approximately two feet of snow accumulated. Because December was so mild, in relative terms, Lake Huron has not yet frozen other than very close to shore. Consequently we are getting a lot of "lake effect snow". You should Google that term for a full explanation of the phenomenon. Your question on on provisional ball has been well answered by now. All I can add is that, when officiating in PGA events in Ireland, we always paid close attention to a caddie who had been sent down the fairway to watch the tee shots. More than one player has had a rude awakening when he was told three or four minutes later that I started to stopwatch when his caddie made the first move to look for his ball - even if only for a few seconds before going back to watch the subsequent tee shots. The search had been started by the player's side and you cannot stop-start a search. In RCGA amateur events, caddies are more of a rarity or, quite frequently, barred by a condition of competition. Cheers JohnT
From: david s-a on 8 Jan 2010 05:12 Paul Schmitz-Josten wrote: > david s-a in <7qhoskFuvgU1(a)mid.individual.net>: > > What if they don't start to look because they want to play the provisional > without searching? ;-> > >> The provisional ball becomes the ball in play if the player makes a >> stroke with it from this place or from a point nearer the hole than this >> place. > > See above... If the relevant persons decide not to search for the ball, there is still nevertheless a place where the ball is likely to be. In deciding not to search for the ball one presumes that the ball is likely to be OOB, or is otherwise in an unplayable area. The players proceed at the risk of the original ball being found, by others, in a water hazard, or elsewhere, and even in an unplayable position.. Its actual location and the timing of its discovery can be addressed in terms of the rules and the game can move on from there accordingly. > >> It also becomes the ball in play as soon as it is lifted with the >> intention of taking relief from a condition allowed under the rules at >> either of these places > > ACK. Never thought of this before, though. > >> If the original ball is known and virtually certain to be out of bounds >> at the outset the second ball is not a provisional ball and is the ball >> in play. > > The rule says: "If a ball may be OOB... a provisional ball may be > played..." > > Does this prevent the player from playing a provisional if the first ball > is "known" to be OOB? Of course it does, the definition of a 'provisional ball' says it all, it can only be played for a ball that MAYBE OOB or lost outside a water hazard. > > Imagine this real situation: I once played a slice high into the woods at > the right hand side - nothing to be seen, no sound heard - and the second > one to the left. There I found my original ball (brand and number) on the > fairway - it must have bounced out of the wood and some 40 m across the > course though I was virtually certain that it was deep in the forest. > Was the second ball no provisional even if I named it so? .....yes, this was a valid call. The location of a ball can rarely be known or virtually certain if there are trees intervening on its line of flight (or dribble!) >> If the original ball is discovered to be out of bounds during >> the search the provisional ball has always been the ball in play. > > Consequences? (curious) No consequences, just a fact of life! > >> The provisional ball becomes the ball in play as soon as the original is >> deemed lost outside a water hazard, [...] > > IMO a player cannot deem a ball lost. He may refrain from looking for it > or stop searching, but the only facts which replace a lost ball are > - expiration of the five minutes, > - to bring another ball into play, > or > - to play the provisional from closer to the hole. > Paul, I did not suggest that the player himself deemed the ball 'lost'. It is the Rules of Golf that deem the ball lost if it is not found within the five minute search period, or if a stroke and distance procedure is adopted before the time expires, or if the provisional is played from a place closer to the hole. Be careful about the phase 'to bring another ball into play'. Unless it is done according to the stroke and distance procedure then there is a possible case for an illegal substitution of a ball for a ball in play. ciao David
From: david s-a on 9 Jan 2010 15:20
JPW wrote: > David, > > Thanks for your response. You touch on one of the points under > discussion. In the following paragraph you describe 'the place' > perfectly and your reason for commencing timing at the time stated is > without question. > > > In my view, 'the place where the original ball is likely to be' is > the > place where any of the the player's side, including his/their > caddies, > start looking for it. When observing play this where I start timing. > > > In your next paragraph (below) you follow 27-2b exactly by using > **from this place**. > How many times as a referee, and in your private play, have you seen a > provisional ball come to rest 'at this place'? > 'Nearer the hole than this place' is quite an acceptable description > of a point which contributes to making the provisional ball become the > ball in play! > Pat, If you want to put this to bed, at dinner last night I spoke with R&A Director-Rules of Golf, Grant Moir, who is visiting Melbourne as part of a Golf Australia Rules of Golf Workshop, and had joined us for the day at the 'Vic Open'. I discussed this very point with him...he was perplexed at first, then called for a Rule Book...then agreed that he saw our point. We finally agreed that the phrase 'at this place' etc should really be read as 'this area' etc...!!. As to 'how often do you see a provisional ball' land in the same area as the original....the answer is 'quite often' in my experience...it is not at all unusual. I complained that 'why should a provisional ball played from that area' render the original ball 'lost', when a provisional ball played from any other equidistant (from the hole) point doesn't., and why does that particular part of the rule exist anyway!' He was silent on that. He did share a story on an unusual situations submitted for a 'decision', where a group of three elderly gentlemen had tee'd off and having hit their balls into a suspect area all except one had played provisionals. They went forward to search and the two with provisionals found their balls while the third searched for the full five minute period allowed and failed to find his ball. He returned to the tee and on arriving he was surprised to find his ball sitting neatly on a tee on the teeing ground. HE HAD FORGOTTEN TO PLAY HIS TEE SHOT!!!! So what was the ruling for a player who had searched five minutes for a ball that he had not even put into play? It seems that in equity the R&A expressed sympathy for the gentleman concerned, wrote him a kind letter explaining that they were unable to find any reason to penalise him...and asked him to keep his wits about him when on the teeing ground in future!! cheers david |