Drop procedure for TIO and wrong putting green.

[Augster]

In the final round of the LIV event today, on 17, Patrick Reed yanked his drive over by a wrong putting green. The tower behind that green was in his line of play, so he got TIO relief. The point they ended up using was the fringe of the putting green. This put his right-handed stance on the green. He now has to take relief for the wrong putting green stance. 
 

The ref in the booth got it right, saying he’d have to take relief for that stance. The ref on the course got it wrong and let Reed play the ball as it lies. Here nor there. 
 

The relief for the wrong green stance was always going to end up needing TIO relief. It was a big tower. The relief for TIO was always going to end up on the fringe. 
 

In this case, at what point is the player allowed to take relief from both conditions simultaneously? Or do they just drop infinitely until there is a weird hop and the reference point eventually ends up with the players feet off the green, or the player decides to not take TIO relief. 
 

Thanks. 

[Mr. Bean]

There used to be a Decision saying that if taking relief from the 2nd condition returns the ball essentially to the original spot then relief may be taken from both conditions simultaneously. This can probably found in current Rules as well. EDIT: Yup, 16.1/3, last paragraph.

 

Referee's call.

 

(Letting a player to play from a place where playing is prohibited is weird. Never would have gone that route.)

 

Edited July 14 by Mr. Bean

[Colin L]

Are we sure that MLR D-3  (whereby you do not get relief if the interference by the wrong green is only to intended stance) wasn't in place?  

[davep043]

23 minutes ago, Colin L said:

Are we sure that MLR D-3  (whereby you do not get relief if the interference by the wrong green is only to intended stance) wasn't in place?  

I had the same thought, I'd expect the real referee to be more up to date on the local rules for that event than the guy in the booth.

[Mr. Bean]

1 hour ago, Colin L said:

Are we sure that MLR D-3  (whereby you do not get relief if the interference by the wrong green is only to intended stance) wasn't in place?  

 

Just to create thoughts, why such a MLR exists? In which situation ruining the surface of a putting green is of such low importance?

[Newby]

5 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

Just to create thoughts, why such a MLR exists? In which situation ruining the surface of a putting green is of such low importance?

Why would just standing on it ruin the surface?

[Schulzmc]

 

7 minutes ago, Newby said:

Why would just standing on it ruin the surface?

I definitely twist my left foot (a lot!) when I swing, which leaves some deep marks on the tee box that I have to tamp down. Imagine me doing that on a putting green

[Socrates]

7 hours ago, Augster said:

In this case, at what point is the player allowed to take relief from both conditions simultaneously? Or do they just drop infinitely until there is a weird hop and the reference point eventually ends up with the players feet off the green, or the player decides to not take TIO relief. 
 

Thanks. 

The answer to that part of the question is never.  You always deal with one situation first and then deal with anything that arises after you have dealt with the 1st one.

[iacas]

4 minutes ago, Socrates said:

The answer to that part of the question is never.  You always deal with one situation first and then deal with anything that arises after you have dealt with the 1st one.

“However, in such situations, the player may not, in a single procedure, concurrently take relief from two conditions by dropping a ball in a single relief area determined by a combined nearest point of complete relief from both conditions, except in the situation where the player has successively taken relief for interference from each condition and is essentially back where the player started.”

 

Edited July 14 by iacas
Bolded

[Socrates]

8 minutes ago, iacas said:

“However, in such situations, the player may not, in a single procedure, concurrently take relief from two conditions by dropping a ball in a single relief area determined by a combined nearest point of complete relief from both conditions, except in the situation where the player has successively taken relief for interference from each condition and is essentially back where the player started.”

 

Alrighty then.   In that case the player should just go home.

[Socrates]

15 minutes ago, iacas said:

“However, in such situations, the player may not, in a single procedure, concurrently take relief from two conditions by dropping a ball in a single relief area determined by a combined nearest point of complete relief from both conditions, except in the situation where the player has successively taken relief for interference from each condition and is essentially back where the player started.”

 

While I did find that in the Definitions, so somewhere, sometime that must have happened.  To ever see it again, I would be willing to bet against it.

[sui generis]

16 minutes ago, Socrates said:

Alrighty then.   In that case the player should just go home.

I reff alot and this situation happens more than you might think. 😉

[rogolf]

That situation is commonly known as the "ping pong" rule.

[Augster]

Thanks for the answers!

 

If Reed had taken relief from the wrong putting green, he absolutely would have been behind the TIO again. 
 

I did not know there could be a MLR where one CAN play a ball from the fringe while standing on a wrong putting green. 
 

EDiT:

 

It looks like around the green they had the worlds shortest “fringe” then the regular fringe that he dropped in. So he was standing in the “first cut” of “fringe” and not on the putting green. It’s just the way they cut them at Valderrama I guess. 
 

I wonder how many guys marked their balls in that “first cut” of fringe during the week. I’m hoping zero. 
 

Thanks for the help!

Edited July 14 by Augster

[davep043]

3 hours ago, Socrates said:

While I did find that in the Definitions, so somewhere, sometime that must have happened.  To ever see it again, I would be willing to bet against it.

Like @sui generis, I've seen it enough times that I remember the procedure well.  You might see it with a cart path and relatively near-by Temporary Water.  A smart Player might be able choose which ACC to take relief from first, in order to get to a more desirable final relief area.

[Socrates]

5 hours ago, davep043 said:

Like @sui generis, I've seen it enough times that I remember the procedure well.  You might see it with a cart path and relatively near-by Temporary Water.  A smart Player might be able choose which ACC to take relief from first, in order to get to a more desirable final relief area.

In 50 odd years of playing, I've never been in that kind of situation.  I must be blessed.

[antip]

9 hours ago, rogolf said:

That situation is commonly known as the "ping pong" rule.

LOL, in my part of the world is the "yo yo" rule.

1 hour ago, Socrates said:

In 50 odd years of playing, I've never been in that kind of situation.  I must be blessed.

And usually this experience is because the regular dude on the course is unaware of the requirements of the rules and takes relief from both conditions in one step. It is extremely common to have more than one relief rule apply at the same time - for example, any time preferred lies (lift, clean, place) is in effect and other conditions such as temporary water or GUR overlap.

Edited July 15 by antip

[Mr. Bean]

16 hours ago, Schulzmc said:

 

I definitely twist my left foot (a lot!) when I swing, which leaves some deep marks on the tee box that I have to tamp down. Imagine me doing that on a putting green

 

Exactly. Not to mention the downward force of legs when really hitting the ball.

[Mr. Bean]

4 hours ago, antip said:

 

And usually this experience is because the regular dude on the course is unaware of the requirements of the rules and takes relief from both conditions in one step. It is extremely common to have more than one relief rule apply at the same time - for example, any time preferred lies (lift, clean, place) is in effect and other conditions such as temporary water or GUR overlap.

 

I fail to find any relevance with LCP in this case as with LCP there is no "full relief" requirement.

 

 

[Mr. Bean]

5 hours ago, Socrates said:

In 50 odd years of playing, I've never been in that kind of situation.  I must be blessed.

 

I cannot remember if Ihave seen it either but I have learned the Rule some decades ago.

[antip]

3 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

I fail to find any relevance with LCP in this case as with LCP there is no "full relief" requirement.

 

 

I'm not following this.

Preferred lies has extremely specific requirements. An example: preferred lies is in place (card length) and your ball is in temporary water in the fairway. You lift and place your ball just inside the one club length for TW relief and hit the ball. Ruling: general penalty, you have played from a wrong place - you failed to comply with the requirements of either rule.
My point was when two relief conditions apply, you cannot take relief from both simultaneously to a spot that complies with neither rule individually.

[Mr. Bean]

2 hours ago, antip said:

I'm not following this.

Preferred lies has extremely specific requirements. An example: preferred lies is in place (card length) and your ball is in temporary water in the fairway. You lift and place your ball just inside the one club length for TW relief and hit the ball. Ruling: general penalty, you have played from a wrong place - you failed to comply with the requirements of either rule.
My point was when two relief conditions apply, you cannot take relief from both simultaneously to a spot that complies with neither rule individually.

 

It seems we are thinking this one in a very different way.

 

It is very possible to comply with TW and LCP at the same time by only taking full relief from TW. Your example of not complying with LCP requirements was not about taking full relief but not following the requirements of LCP LR. And once more, LCP does not require any full relief, only relief within a certain relief area.

 

No problem, let's move on.

[antip]

11 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

It seems we are thinking this one in a very different way.

 

It is very possible to comply with TW and LCP at the same time by only taking full relief from TW. Your example of not complying with LCP requirements was not about taking full relief but not following the requirements of LCP LR. And once more, LCP does not require any full relief, only relief within a certain relief area.

 

No problem, let's move on.

Agree, it's no big issue. But my point all along has been you cannot do the two different reliefs in one step, the Rules simply don't permit that. Which examples we use don't matter. If you are just complying with the requirements of one of the two, no problem, you then potentially have a choice about whether you proceed with the second, if you remain entitled in that fresh situation.

[sui generis]

I'll confess to late one afternoon in Georgia when the temp was about 95* and the dew point was about 75*, that faced with a ping-pong, I once said to the player, "Drop it over there."

 

"Thank you, sir," she replied. (Her parents, who were following, seemed okay, too,)

 

Go ahead, throw me out of the forum. 😉

[rogolf]

7 minutes ago, sui generis said:

I'll confess to late one afternoon in Georgia when the temp was about 95* and the dew point was about 75*, that faced with a ping-pong, I once said to the player, "Drop it over there."

 

"Thank you, sir," she replied. (Her parents, who were following, seemed okay, too,)

 

Go ahead, throw me out of the forum. 😉

I think that I've seen videos of such occurrences before, perhaps from the PGA Tour or USGA, where the referee said something like "You're with me, drop it here."  Done for expediency.  Ok for referees to authorize that, but not for players to do it on their own.  (sui, you're back in!)

[antip]

1 hour ago, sui generis said:

I'll confess to late one afternoon in Georgia when the temp was about 95* and the dew point was about 75*, that faced with a ping-pong, I once said to the player, "Drop it over there."

 

"Thank you, sir," she replied. (Her parents, who were following, seemed okay, too,)

 

Go ahead, throw me out of the forum. 😉

You tinkered with the dark side, human nature!

[sui generis]

15 minutes ago, antip said:

You tinkered with the dark side, human nature!

Mea culpa. It was hot and I was tired (and thirsty). 😉

[Mr. Bean]

4 hours ago, rogolf said:

 (sui, you're back in!)

 

Hey, I did not get a chance to vote!!

 

Ok, Sui's back 😁

[davep043]

9 hours ago, sui generis said:

I'll confess to late one afternoon in Georgia when the temp was about 95* and the dew point was about 75*, that faced with a ping-pong, I once said to the player, "Drop it over there."

 

"Thank you, sir," she replied. (Her parents, who were following, seemed okay, too,)

 

Go ahead, throw me out of the forum. 😉

I haven't done that with the ping pong situation,  but I HAVE done it combining Penalty Area relief with subsequent 16.1 relief for a cart path.  I do a lot of junior events, and with those I usually do the full two steps as a teaching tool.

[rogolf]

3 hours ago, davep043 said:

I haven't done that with the ping pong situation,  but I HAVE done it combining Penalty Area relief with subsequent 16.1 relief for a cart path.  I do a lot of junior events, and with those I usually do the full two steps as a teaching tool.

We have that situation on one hole at our course and review it with the referees every time we host an event.  Of course, members do it in one step every time.  If I'm in the group, I do explain to my playing partners the correct procedure, but don't insist that they use it.