Drop procedure for TIO and wrong putting green.

[st1800e]

12 hours ago, rogolf said:

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.

Actually happened to me in a provincial tourney last year. Cart path crossing the fairway and temporary water.  Ping pong.  Called for an official, he said something about doing both at the same time, (not verbatim)  and told me to “drop it here”, clear of both path and water, not closer to hole.  

[Mr. Bean]

1 hour ago, st1800e said:

Actually happened to me in a provincial tourney last year. Cart path crossing the fairway and temporary water.  Ping pong.  Called for an official, he said something about doing both at the same time, (not verbatim)  and told me to “drop it here”, clear of both path and water, not closer to hole.  

 

"Cart path crossing the fairway and temporary water.  Ping pong."

 

I have a hard time to picture this. There is always one club-length to work with. Could you draw a picture?

 

(Of course, if the player does not really seek for suitable relief process this ping pong may happen. Or if the player is not really aware of the Rule.)

[iacas]

1 hour ago, Mr. Bean said:

"Cart path crossing the fairway and temporary water.  Ping pong."

 

I have a hard time to picture this. There is always one club-length to work with. Could you draw a picture?

 

Really?

 

 

You could easily ping pong between the ball in the temporary water (bright blue not to indicate a pond or penalty area, just to say that's the temporary water area) — the darker footprints and the ball leaving your stance on the cart path. The nearest point for each is in the other.

 

The question then becomes is the nearest point of relief from both A or farther down in the direction of the arrow near B if the temporary water area continues to move away from the path enough to let the player take a stance.

 

 

Edited July 16 by iacas

[Socrates]

3 hours ago, iacas said:

 

Really?

 

 

You could easily ping pong between the ball in the temporary water (bright blue not to indicate a pond or penalty area, just to say that's the temporary water area) — the darker footprints and the ball leaving your stance on the cart path. The nearest point for each is in the other.

 

The question then becomes is the nearest point of relief from both A or farther down in the direction of the arrow near B if the temporary water area continues to move away from the path enough to let the player take a stance.

 

 

It took me a minute to wrap my head around this, but I got it.  Just nothing I've run into and if I have, the temp. water extended right to the edge of the path and then the relief becomes obvious.

[Augster]

8 hours ago, iacas said:

 

Really?

 

 

You could easily ping pong between the ball in the temporary water (bright blue not to indicate a pond or penalty area, just to say that's the temporary water area) — the darker footprints and the ball leaving your stance on the cart path. The nearest point for each is in the other.

 

The question then becomes is the nearest point of relief from both A or farther down in the direction of the arrow near B if the temporary water area continues to move away from the path enough to let the player take a stance.

 

 

This. 
 

The right handed player’s relief from the path with always be in the temp water. The temp water relief is always putting the player on the path. Infinite loop. 
 

Great illustration iacas!

 

Before the 2019 Rule changes, the ball could roll up to 2CL’s outside the relief area. Eventually one could escape this if the ball bounced on the path correctly and moved the player across it. 
 

After 2019, the ball must stay in the relief area. No chance of escape no matter how many times you drop. 

[rogolf]

5 hours ago, Socrates said:

It took me a minute to wrap my head around this, but I got it.  Just nothing I've run into and if I have, the temp. water extended right to the edge of the path and then the relief becomes obvious.

Maybe, maybe not.  Depends on where the ball and stance are located (ball could be in temp water, stance on cart path or vice versa).  The player may well have a choice of which condition (temp water or cart path) to take relief from first.  The careful player will check out the relief options (and the next relief options) before lifting the ball.

Or, how about temp water on a cart path?

Edited July 17 by rogolf

[Mr. Bean]

11 hours ago, iacas said:

 

Really?

 

 

You could easily ping pong between the ball in the temporary water (bright blue not to indicate a pond or penalty area, just to say that's the temporary water area) — the darker footprints and the ball leaving your stance on the cart path. The nearest point for each is in the other.

 

The question then becomes is the nearest point of relief from both A or farther down in the direction of the arrow near B if the temporary water area continues to move away from the path enough to let the player take a stance.

 

 

 

Is that path really crossing the fairway..?

 

Another thing. If you take full relief from TW downwards in the picture (1 cl) and again downwards from the path you will pretty soon arrive to a spot where you can get relief of both. This picture is not what IMO is described in 16.1/3 (essentially back where the player started). A completely different thing is whether the referee would like to speed things up (as in some previous posts) but it is certainly not necessary, provided the player honestly tries their best to get full relief from both conditions one at a time.

 

Of course, if the TW parallels the path longer than in the picture the situation changes so I am only referring to this particular picture.

 

 

 

Edited July 17 by Mr. Bean

[iacas]

7 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

This picture is not what IMO is described in 16.1/3 (essentially back where the player started).

 

Except that it is.

 

The image is very obviously not to scale, unless the person is playing a VERY large golf ball or has very small feet (with a tiny cart path). I only added the cut-in to show that you could eventually, way past B in the direction of the arrow, get to a point of relief.

 

Could you zig-zag downward and eventually get relief from both conditions? Maybe… but what if that's going to take twelve drops to get there? This is what's described in the Clarification — you can just skip to the end after seeing that you're going to be going back and forth.

[davep043]

7 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

Another thing. If you take full relief from TW downwards in the picture (1 cl) and again downwards from the path you will pretty soon arrive to a spot where you can get relief of both.

As @iacas says, the Player CAN do this zig-zag dropping, but is not required to do so.  He may actually prefer to remain at about the same distance from the hole, rather than working his way away from it.  The Clarification offers a simple and (comparatively) quick way to resolve the situation.

[Socrates]

10 hours ago, rogolf said:

Maybe, maybe not.  Depends on where the ball and stance are located (ball could be in temp water, stance on cart path or vice versa).  The player may well have a choice of which condition (temp water or cart path) to take relief from first.  The careful player will check out the relief options (and the next relief options) before lifting the ball.

Or, how about temp water on a cart path?

Yes, the smart player will figure out before hand which relief option is the best course of action.  Some pick up the ball too soon and then are stuck with a course of actions that they may not have wanted.  I think we saw that with someone on a path not liking their subsequent relief options and couldn't go back.  

[davep043]

29 minutes ago, Socrates said:

I think we saw that with someone on a path not liking their subsequent relief options and couldn't go back.

Well they CAN go back, it just costs 1 PS under 9.4b/4.  I think we saw Bryson do this at the US Open, lifted his ball from a crosswalk (GUR) thinking he could drop one place, a Referee identified a different place as his Nearest Point of Complete Relief.  He didn't really like that area, wanted to replace the ball, and was told he'd have a 1-stroke penalty if he did.  So he ended up taking free relief in the appropriate location.

[Mr. Bean]

3 hours ago, davep043 said:

As @iacas says, the Player CAN do this zig-zag dropping, but is not required to do so.  He may actually prefer to remain at about the same distance from the hole, rather than working his way away from it.  The Clarification offers a simple and (comparatively) quick way to resolve the situation.

 

I do not see anywhere in the Rules that the referee could not point to the player that he could work his way through the procedure and simply point the player an area where to drop a ball. This spot might very well be further away frtom the hole than where the player would like it to be.

 

I am still missing if a cart path that runs on the fairway to the direction of play would be crossing the fairway. Maybe you can clarify that? My dictionary implies that a crossing road is (more or less) perpendicular, not parallel.

[iacas]

 

21 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

I do not see anywhere in the Rules that the referee could not point to the player that he could work his way through the procedure and simply point the player an area where to drop a ball. This spot might very well be further away frtom the hole than where the player would like it to be.

 

Again (emphasis added):

 

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.

 

The player could drop from the temporary water and be on the cart path. Relief from the cart path could have them dropping in the temporary water. They are "essentially back where [they] started."

 

They're not required to zig-zag backward to work their way toward an area where they may be able to successfully take relief from both, especially if that may take a series of twelve drops.

 

I said all of this earlier in the post you chose to reply to with an inaccurate personal comment rather than actually advancing the topic.

Edited July 18 by SheriffBooth

[Augster]

6 hours ago, iacas said:

 

No, I'm not saying it is because I say it is, I'm saying it because it objectively is a decent representation of the issue, and you're the lone individual saying it's not.

 

 

Again (emphasis added):

 

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.

 

The player could drop from the temporary water and be on the cart path. Relief from the cart path could have them dropping in the temporary water. They are "essentially back where [they] started."

 

They're not required to zig-zag backward to work their way toward an area where they may be able to successfully take relief from both, especially if that may take a series of twelve drops.

 

I said all of this earlier in the post you chose to reply to with an inaccurate personal comment rather than actually advancing the topic.

He doesn’t think you’re drawing shows the path “crossing the fairway” enough because it is parallel. Nothing to do with the actual rule being discussed. 
 

If one could move the path a couple of degrees away from the TW, then, eventually, it’d be “crossing the fairway”. But most can just imagine it that way. 
 

I’m guessing he wants a drawing of the cart path going 90* across the fairway, and the “ping pong” situation still happening. Much tougher to do because one can’t drop closer to the hole, so eventually, a player can take relief one or the other, and not ping pong. 

[iacas]

50 minutes ago, Augster said:

He doesn’t think you’re drawing shows the path “crossing the fairway” enough because it is parallel. Nothing to do with the actual rule being discussed.

 

I don't think the "crossing" bit was the main part of his "disagreement." It got a few words, while "another thing" got all of this:

 

19 hours ago, Mr. Bean said:

Another thing. If you take full relief from TW downwards in the picture (1 cl) and again downwards from the path you will pretty soon arrive to a spot where you can get relief of both. This picture is not what IMO is described in 16.1/3 (essentially back where the player started). A completely different thing is whether the referee would like to speed things up (as in some previous posts) but it is certainly not necessary, provided the player honestly tries their best to get full relief from both conditions one at a time.

 

Of course, if the TW parallels the path longer than in the picture the situation changes so I am only referring to this particular picture.