Free relief ? Tiger can play that shot !

[Kiwi battler]

A somewhat IMO unresolved debate in another thread seemed to under general concenus conlude that , if Tiger Woods or Phil M could play a shot that was more or less impossible for even a low handicapper let alone a newbie to the game ....then if interference from an IO was only a factor when employing stance/swing for Tigers shot , then relief is granted

Now most argued that if Tiger could play the shot ,then it was a "reasonable" shot .....and the players ability DOES NOT ENTER THE EQUATION

But , after further reading the wording of the exception , the rule is more specific than "unreasonable" in fact it says "unreasonable for him to make a stroke"

The word "him" seems to imply that a players ability might be a factor ..

I only bring this up because a similar senerio on another site covered the same issue , with the sites socalled expert , who's rules certification I'm unsure of , made it quite clear that a players personal ability should be considered when granting/denying relief under 24/2b and its exception

He went on to describe an incident at the driving range before a PGA tourney where Jasper Parnavik took a referee aside , dropped a ball under a bush , got down on his , turned his 4iron upside down and hit the ball 150 yards , then said "I just wanted you to know I could do that"

At the end of the day , the player knows if he can make a shot , he knows if the shot is reasonable or not , if he's only concocting the shot in question to get relief where it otherwise wouldnt be free......just like if he addresses the ball in the trees and it rolls 1/4 of an inch , he calls his own penalty if nobody sees it


Whether or not the above is correct I'm not 100% sure , but it IMO warrants further investigation

[sharkshooter]

If there is an IO in the way of me hitting 250 to a green with a creek in front of it, I should not be entitled to relief, as I can't hit that shot. It should not matter that Tiger can do it, the fact is, I cannot.

The question, for me, is what can I reasonably hit. Can I hit a 3-wood 235 over the water? Yes. But if I only expect to be successful 50% of the time, is that reasonable? Where would the % cut-off be for reasonableness?

[Kiwi battler]

Id ask myself , "would I play the 3wood over the water if the IO wasnt there ?"
Another point to consider , is it strokeplay ? if so then I mightnt play the 3wood ....stableford - How many shots do I have left to score ? ...Is it matchplay ? where is my oponent ?

Of course it all could be totally irrelevent if the information I read on the other thread is totally bogus

[LobWedge]

The word "him" refers to the masculine familiar, in place of "the player". It occurs throughout the book. It's not meant as to serve as a comparitor between "that player" and someone else.

[Kiwi battler]

Speak English man

And its terribly sexist as well lol ....women play the game too

[LobWedge]

Speak English man

And its terribly sexist as well lol ....women play the game too

Hey, I didn't write the thing. Blame them.

[BC MIST]

I only bring this up because a similar senerio on another site covered the same issue , with the sites socalled expert , who's rules certification I'm unsure of , made it quite clear that a players personal ability should be considered when granting/denying relief under 24/2b and its exception…..
Whether or not the above is correct I'm not 100% sure , but it IMO warrants further investigation

Referring to the Slattery/Russian Open tournament? Seems that relief was granted based on the “opinion” that the unplayable lie was caused by the burrowing animal hole. In viewing the video, two simple questions come to mind: (1) did the animal make the hole because there was space under the roots, or (2) was the space by the roots caused by the animal making the hole? Because the ball appeared to be sitting on top of the ground, albeit, under the tree, my opinion is that the hole, hence the unplayable lie, was there before the animal decided to take up residence. The exception would then apply and relief would not be granted.

[Kiwi battler]

Well that was kinda random BC lol ....not quite the track I was trying to take

[AAA]

Note, the ruling made by the ROs has not been approved (yet ?) by the RBs.

[BC MIST]

Well that was kinda random BC lol ....not quite the track I was trying to take

Glad you were humoured. It seems that nothing from everyone is better than something from someone. I am not the only one who slipped off the rails.