Unplayable in a Bunker

[BC MIST]

Mississippi Golf Club, number 4, is a par 3 with a bunker at the back of the green. Mike hits his tee shot and the ball buries under the lip of the very back part of the circular bunker. Thinking he can play a shot sideways, he makes a stroke at the ball, but instead, drives the ball even further into the lip of the bunker.

What are Mike's options?

[sillywilly]

put the ball in the same place it was last time and hit again (1 stroke). 2 club lengths either left or right no closer to the hole... 1 stoke

i think

[spackler]

He could keep swinging at it or he could declare it unplayable. If I understand the position correctly, he can't use either the two club length option (because he must drop in a bunker and it can't be closer to the hole), and neither can he use the option of dropping on a line behind the unplayable lie and the hole (because it must be dropped in the bunker and he's caught under the back lip). So he has to take the first option, which is to replace the ball to it's original position and try to hit it out sideways again. At the cost of a stroke penalty. Basically what SillyWilly said.

[BC MIST]

He could keep swinging at it or he could declare it unplayable. If I understand the position correctly, he can't use either the two club length option (because he must drop in a bunker and it can't be closer to the hole), and neither can he use the option of dropping on a line behind the unplayable lie and the hole (because it must be dropped in the bunker and he's caught under the back lip). So he has to take the first option, which is to replace the ball to it's original position and try to hit it out sideways again. At the cost of a stroke penalty.

Stroke and distance (back to the tee) is out, 2 club lengths is out, back on line is out, and in some cases, dropping where the second stroke was made, may be out, too.

It seems that there are rare occasions where both a shot and relief from the predicament is not possible, so the golfer must just hack away and hope that he can get the ball out. Should "In equity" not be allowed to be considered? Perhaps a regression rule where the golfer could go back to the tee or a rule where, under a penalty of an additional stroke, the ball could be dropped outside the bunker, would at least give the golfer a chance to continue play.

[1dash1]

BC Mist:

If you were to ask the ruling bodies, the official answer would be to play on. There is no relief for situations such as this. Rule 1-4 does not apply. If the player cannot extract himself, then he is out of luck.

I am not sure that I agree with the ruling bodies on this one. However, I admit to having no compelling arguments to the contrary. I just don't feel that it is right to not give the player some option for getting out of a sticky wicket.

[BC MIST]

BC Mist:

If you were to ask the ruling bodies, the official answer would be to play on. There is no relief for situations such as this. Rule 1-4 does not apply. If the player cannot extract himself, then he is out of luck.

I am not sure that I agree with the ruling bodies on this one. However, I admit to having no compelling arguments to the contrary. I just don't feel that it is right to not give the player some option for getting out of a sticky wicket.

Agreed. It is something that the USGA and the R&A should consider for the next revision, IMO.

To bring this to their attention, if it is not already, to whom should a letter be sent?

[1dash1]

BC Mist:

Since you're in R&A territory, I'd suggest the request be acted upon by them:
http://www.randa.org/index.cfm?action=contact.home

And I'd recommend following the formal process, if you have the time to do so:

a. Type up a draft recommendation, including:
- Brief description of the situation covered, including anecdotal competition examples (if any);
- Rule number and ruling under the current language;
- Reason why the rule or ruling should be changed;
- Proposed new language;
- Applicable decisions affected by the change;
- Effect on related rules (if any).
b. Submit the draft to your club or regional or national organization for them to submit under their letterhead (i.e., their approval).
c. The organization forwards it to the next higher authority.

Note: The draft need not necessarily be as complex as I have described. A good idea is a good idea. Submit whatever information you can.

However, you are not necessarily constrained by the formal process. You may submit the idea directly. (Of course, if you went through the formal process, you can expect the idea would receive somewhat more attention than as an individual suggestion.)

And if you happen to be an officer in a regional (provincial) or national organization, I'd suggest that you consult with their rules committee before taking any independent action. You don't want to step on anyone's toes unnecessarily.

[BC MIST]

BC Mist:

Since you're in R&A territory, I'd suggest the request be acted upon by them:
http://www.randa.org/index.cfm?action=contact.home

And I'd recommend following the formal process, if you have the time to do so:

a. Type up a draft recommendation, including:
- Brief description of the situation covered, including anecdotal competition examples (if any);
- Rule number and ruling under the current language;
- Reason why the rule or ruling should be changed;
- Proposed new language;
- Applicable decisions affected by the change;
- Effect on related rules (if any).
b. Submit the draft to your club or regional or national organization for them to submit under their letterhead (i.e., their approval).
c. The organization forwards it to the next higher authority.

Note: The draft need not necessarily be as complex as I have described. A good idea is a good idea. Submit whatever information you can.

However, you are not necessarily constrained by the formal process. You may submit the idea directly. (Of course, if you went through the formal process, you can expect the idea would receive somewhat more attention than as an individual suggestion.)

And if you happen to be an officer in a regional (provincial) or national organization, I'd suggest that you consult with their rules committee before taking any independent action. You don't want to step on anyone's toes unnecessarily.

Thanks for all the information. I just may do as you suggested.

I am not part of any rules organization, however, one of the ladies who gave the recent Level 3 RCGA Rules seminar which I attended, is head of rules for our province. When I find time I will write something up and send it to her for consideration.