A Comedy of Errors

[BC MIST]

From The Leith Society - a story.

In a stroke play tournament, on a 180 yard par 3, a player played his tee shot that flew into a tree on the tee side of a wide stream, i.e., water hazard, that runs across in front of the putting green. Although there was no evidence to that affect, the player believed that the ball likely finished up in the water hazard.

Because he did not want to waste time by walking across the bridge to see if his ball was on the other side, he played a provisional ball under rule 26-1, “Relief for ball in Water hazard.” On reaching the other side of the hazard, he found his original ball, pocketed his provisional ball, played out the hole with his original ball in one pitch shot and two putts,

What ruling would you make and what score would the player end up with on the hole?

[Hacker]

OK, I want to try one of these for real............

In order to proceed under 26-1 there must be "reasonable evidence" the that the ball is lodge in the hazard. This scenario clearly states that this reasonable evidence did NOT exist, therefore the player should have proceeded under Rule 27-1.

Since the player believe that he was proceeding under 26-1 he would NOT have declared that he was playing a provisional ball. Since he was actually proceeding under 27-1 which requires him to declare the ball as a provisional and since he didn't that ball that he plays (the one he thinks is playing under 26-1) become the ball in play under penalty of stroke and sistance. Meaning that he is sitting 3 off of the tee.

The player then proceeds to pick up the ball in play and plays his original ball which is no considered abandoned. The penalty for playing the wrong ball is two strokes. So he is now sitting 5 and must play the hole out from as close as possible to where his second ball landed off of the tee. Failure to do this before teeing off on the next hole would result in disqualification. The chip and two putts to not count because they were strokes made at a wrong ball.

Did I brutalize that as much as I think??

[Kilroy]

If he did not state that the ball was a provisional then you'd be correct that the second ball was in play.

In this case one must assume the player did declare the ball as a provisional. Otherwise how would it have been established that his intention was to play a provisional?

Which leads to the question... Under what circumstances is a player allowed to hit a provisional ball?

[Hacker]

If he did not state that the ball was a provisional then you'd be correct that the second ball was in play.

In this case one must assume the player did declare the ball as a provisional. Otherwise how would it have been established that his intention was to play a provisional?

Which leads to the question... Under what circumstances is a player allowed to hit a provisional ball?

He thought the ball was in the water so he proceeded under 26-1 by playing a ball from as closely as possible to the original stroke, this isn't a provisional so he wouldn't have declared it as such......at least that is my reading of it.

[Kilroy]

BC said "he played a provisional" so I would assume the player declared it a provisional. The question revolves around the validity of the ball's status as a provisional under these circumstances.


Moving on:

• The player believed the ball was in the water (despite the lack of knowlege or virtual certainty).
• Provisionals cannot be played for a ball lost in a water hazard. - Is he allowed to play this ball as a provisional?
• As it turns out the ball was not lost in the hazard, since it was found in the rough beyond the hazard.
• Since the ball was not lost in a water hazzard, could the provisional ultimately be valid after all?

Does the players statement that he thinks the ball is in the hazzard make his "provisional" not a provisional, but the ball in play?

[Hacker]

BC said "he played a provisional" so I would assume the player declared it a provisional. The question revolves around the validity of the ball's status as a provisional under these circumstances.


Moving on:

• The player believed the ball was in the water (despite the lack of knowlege or virtual certainty).
• Provisionals cannot be played for a ball lost in a water hazard. - Is he allowed to play this ball as a provisional?
• As it turns out the ball was not lost in the hazard, since it was found in the rough beyond the hazard.
• Since the ball was not lost in a water hazzard, could the provisional ultimately be valid after all?

Does the players statement that he thinks the ball is in the hazzard make his "provisional" not a provisional, but the ball in play?

All excellent points Dan, but the bolded ones are the ones that have me totally perplexed.......I can't wait to get the definitive ruling on this on

[BC MIST]

BC said "he played a provisional" so I would assume the player declared it a provisional. The question revolves around the validity of the ball's status as a provisional under these circumstances.

Indeed, when I stated that he played a provisional one must assume that it was declared.

When analyzing scenarios like the one above, I simply ask, "What should he have done?" and then, "What mistakes did he make?" To the list of mistakes I then add the applicable penalties to the strokes he actually made.

In dropping and playing the provisional ball, did he not make two serious mistakes?
In trying to correct his errors, I see two more serious errors.

[Hacker]

Indeed, when I stated that he played a provisional one must assume that it was declared.

When analyzing scenarios like the one above, I simply ask, "What should he have done?" and then, "What mistakes did he make?" To the list of mistakes I then add the applicable penalties to the strokes he actually made.

In dropping and playing the provisional ball, did he not make two serious mistakes?
In trying to correct his errors, I see two more serious errors.

I don't mean to belabor this point, but you keep talking about a provisional ball under rule 26-1 and I don't see a provision for a provisional ball under 26-1 as it deals with "Relief for a ball IN a Water Hazard" and you clear show that there is not reasonable evidence to assume that the ball is lost in the water hazard.

[Kilroy]

26-1 and I don't see a provision for a provisional ball under 26-1 as it deals with "Relief for a ball IN a Water Hazard" and you clear show that there is not reasonable evidence to assume that the ball is lost in the water hazard.

Perhaps that was the players first mistake.

[BC MIST]

I don't mean to belabor this point, but you keep talking about a provisional ball under rule 26-1 and I don't see a provision for a provisional ball under 26-1 as it deals with "Relief for a ball IN a Water Hazard" and you clear show that there is not reasonable evidence to assume that the ball is lost in the water hazard.

I clarified what he did because you said in post 2 "he would NOT have declared that he was playing a provisional ball...." when in fact, he did.

You are correct when you say that he cannot play a PB by the hazard in the scenario described, so that is obviously one of his mistakes. What rule then, did he break by dropping a provisional by the hazard and what penalty, if any, is incurred?

[Hacker]

I clarified what he did because you said in post 2 "he would NOT have declared that he was playing a provisional ball...." when in fact, he did.

You are correct when you say that he cannot play a PB by the hazard in the scenario described, so that is obviously one of his mistakes. What rule then, did he break by dropping a provisional by the hazard and what penalty, if any, is incurred?

OK, now I see where you are coming from....Thanks

I need to ponder some more

[g8r]

So, if had he hit the 1st ball and thought it may be lost outside the hazard (instead of thinking it was in the hazard) and hit a provisional, would he score a 4?

Can I say "I think that ball may be lost, but I don't know if its in the hazard, so I'll play a provisional?" then find the ball in a hazard, i know I can't play the provisional, but is there a penalty for having done it? To what extent is the players intention (or misinterpretation) of a rule punishable?

[BC MIST]

So, if had he hit the 1st ball and thought it may be lost outside the hazard (instead of thinking it was in the hazard) and hit a provisional, would he score a 4?

Can I say "I think that ball may be lost, but I don't know if its in the hazard, so I'll play a provisional?" then find the ball in a hazard, i know I can't play the provisional, but is there a penalty for having done it? To what extent is the players intention (or misinterpretation) of a rule punishable?

What you said above is fine. Most importantly, you are indicating that the ball may be lost OUTSIDE the hazard, and this is proven in my initial post where I said that the ball flew into a tree. If there was no other place where the ball could be lost, then the second ball hit from the tee would be the ball IN PLAY. This would render the original ball out of play, regardless of whether it is found, in the hazard, elsewhere or not at all.

If a provisional was hit from the tee, then the player would be lying 3 and the score would obviously be 3 plus whatever other strokes that he took, if he played the provisional from a point opposite or ahead of where he felt the original may have been lost, presumably near the tree, or if the original was not found within 5 minutes.

[sensfan63]

What you said above is fine. Most importantly, you are indicating that the ball may be lost OUTSIDE the hazard, and this is proven in my initial post where I said that the ball flew into a tree. If there was no other place where the ball could be lost, then the second ball hit from the tee would be the ball IN PLAY. This would render the original ball out of play, regardless of whether it is found, in the hazard, elsewhere or not at all.

If a provisional was hit from the tee, then the player would be lying 3 and the score would obviously be 3 plus whatever other strokes that he took, if he played the provisional from a point opposite or ahead of where he felt the original may have been lost, presumably near the tree, or if the original was not found within 5 minutes.

If you hit a ball that flies into a tree, that ball could riccochet anywhere. How is hitting a provisional ball an incorrect course of action? Actually, even if you think you are proceeding under a rule which apparently is misunderstood (ie. declaring a provisional for a ball you THINK is in the water), the provisional ball was correctly put in play. The orgininal ball COULD have been lost.

I would say that the entire sequence was played out correctly, even though the understanding of the rules is severely flawed. The player makes a 4.

[gbower]

Sensfan if you check the first post the player said

he played a provisional ball under rule 26-1, “Relief for ball in Water hazard.”

Check when you are allowed to hit a provisional ball and that is not one of them. By hitting the so called provisional it is now the ball in play. I've had this happen a couple of times where the guys have said they were hitting a provisional for a ball hit towards a known hazard but played for a ball lost outside the hazard. Now they must find the ball or play the provisional for a lost ball.

[Hacker]

Does he not suffer a 2 stroke penalty for playing his original ball (which is considered abandoned once he played the second ball from the tee) meaning that he'd be laying 5 (3 off the tee plus 2 for playing the wrong ball). He should then replace the ball in play (the second ball) as close as possible to where it was before he picked it up and count another penalty for touching a ball in play meaning that he'd be laying 6. So his score for the hole would be 6 plus whatever strokes it took to finish out the hole.

[BC MIST]

Does he not suffer a 2 stroke penalty for playing his original ball (which is considered abandoned once he played the second ball from the tee) meaning that he'd be laying 5 (3 off the tee plus 2 for playing the wrong ball). He should then replace the ball in play (the second ball) as close as possible to where it was before he picked it up and count another penalty for touching a ball in play meaning that he'd be laying 6. So his score for the hole would be 6 plus whatever strokes it took to finish out the hole.

You have now picked out most of the player's transgressions correctly.

In post 7 I asked, "What should the player have done." Because it was NOT known or virtually certain that the ball was in the hazard, if he was going to play a provisional, it SHOULD have been played from the tee.

Some questions under "What mistakes did he make?" to narrow down the specific rules that were broken and to determine the applicable penalties.
(1) What rule allows him to play a "provisional" under 26-1?. Provisional is in quotes because it was NOT a provisional. What was it then? Rule? Penalty??
(2) By the rules, from where did he play the ball? Serious breach? Ball in play? Rule? Penalty??
(3) He found his original and picked up the "provisional". Rule? Penalty?
(4) He then played the original ball. Rule? Penalty?

If he played from the next tee without correcting a particular mistake, he is disqualified. What mistake and why the DQ?

Lastly, if he realized his mistakes before teeing off on the next hole and did make the required corrections, how many penalty strokes would he get?

[sensfan63]

You have now picked out most of the player's transgressions correctly.

In post 7 I asked, "What should the player have done." Because it was NOT known or virtually certain that the ball was in the hazard, if he was going to play a provisional, it SHOULD have been played from the tee.

Some questions under "What mistakes did he make?" to narrow down the specific rules that were broken and to determine the applicable penalties.
(1) What rule allows him to play a "provisional" under 26-1?. Provisional is in quotes because it was NOT a provisional. What was it then? Rule? Penalty??
(2) By the rules, from where did he play the ball? Serious breach? Ball in play? Rule? Penalty??
(3) He found his original and picked up the "provisional". Rule? Penalty?
(4) He then played the original ball. Rule? Penalty?

If he played from the next tee without correcting a particular mistake, he is disqualified. What mistake and why the DQ?

Lastly, if he realized his mistakes before teeing off on the next hole and did make the required corrections, how many penalty strokes would he get?

I was under the impression that the provisional WAS played from the tee.

This situation is interesting, however, I don't know ANYONE who quotes a rule when playing a provisional ball. Inherent in the declaring a provisional ball is the knowledge of what a provisional ball actually is...lost ball outside a hazard/out of bounds.

I suppose that in reading the original situation again, it is assumed that the player THINKING the ball went in the hazard makes him say this out loud, and in turn negates the provisional.

[AAA]

however, I don't know ANYONE who quotes a rule when playing a provisional ball

I'm not sure why you mentioned RULE. But they certainly have use the word 'provisional' or quote the Rule No.

[sensfan63]

I'm not sure why you mentioned RULE. But they certainly have use the word 'provisional' or quote the Rule No.

I meant Rule number...

[g8r]

More detail is required. Player hits ball into a tree, says "i think its in the hazard" then say "i'm going to play a provisional, under 26-1". and re-hits from the tee. Is that correct?
What rule states that when you declare a provisional ball, it must be declared along with the rule being used? it just states that you will declare a provisional, which the player did.
So, had the player NOT found his ball, but was not virtually certain that it was in the hazard, and played the provisional, the provisional could then be used. if it was known or virtually certain it was in the hazard, he could not use the provisional and would need to drop at POE.
If the player found his ball in the hazard, but then played the provisional as his "drop", then he broke the rule, because he can't use the provisional in that situation. he would have needed to proceed properly under 26-1.

But, since he declared a provisional (whether or not the players understanding of the rules is adequate, he did DECLARE a provisional) and then found his original ball, and played it out, I'm going to maintain that he scores a 4 for the hole.

[sensfan63]

More detail is required. Player hits ball into a tree, says "i think its in the hazard" then say "i'm going to play a provisional, under 26-1". and re-hits from the tee. Is that correct?
What rule states that when you declare a provisional ball, it must be declared along with the rule being used? it just states that you will declare a provisional, which the player did.
So, had the player NOT found his ball, but was not virtually certain that it was in the hazard, and played the provisional, the provisional could then be used. if it was known or virtually certain it was in the hazard, he could not use the provisional and would need to drop at POE.
If the player found his ball in the hazard, but then played the provisional as his "drop", then he broke the rule, because he can't use the provisional in that situation. he would have needed to proceed properly under 26-1.

But, since he declared a provisional (whether or not the players understanding of the rules is adequate, he did DECLARE a provisional) and then found his original ball, and played it out, I'm going to maintain that he scores a 4 for the hole.

Me too. But BC said something in a later post that indicated that he hit a provisional, but not from the tee box (ie. not really a provisional). We need some clarification.

[BC MIST]

Me too. But BC said something in a later post that indicated that he hit a provisional, but not from the tee box (ie. not really a provisional). We need some clarification.

You do. While I did not make it clear enough, the player played the "provisional" from near the hazard, under 26-1. The player looked in that vicinity of the tree and the hazard, did not find his ball and rather than walk around the hazard and across the bridge, he just played the "provisional" from near the hazard, in case he did not find his ball on the other side.

Had he played a "provisional" from the tee, under 26-1, the ball would have become the ball in play, ( 3 off the tee) rather than a provisional.

Hope this clarifies things and if so, perhaps my questions from above can now be answered. Appreciate the attempts to make the ruling.

BTW: As a joke I sometimes say, " I'm playing a 27-2/a" when I am playing a provisional. Means the same.

[Kilroy]

BTW: As a joke I sometimes say, " I'm playing a 27-2/a" when I am playing a provisional. Means the same.

I love quips like that, Big Bang Theory is one of my favorite shows too.

[AAA]

BC
When he purportedly played his 'provisional' did he declare it ?

[BC MIST]

BC
When he purportedly played his 'provisional' did he declare it ?

Yes

[LobWedge]

Score on the hole is 7, which includes 4 penalty strokes, along with a DQ for "serious breach".

[g8r]

Now I get it....well then, unless he corrects his mistakes, he is DQ'd. If he correts it we don't know what his score will be but he'll have at least 2 penalty strokes for playing a wrong ball.

[BC MIST]

Score on the hole is 7, which includes 4 penalty strokes, along with a DQ for "serious breach".

Two of your 4 penalty strokes come from playing from a wrong place and because it was a serious breach (he should have played from the tee) he was disqualified.

What were the other two for?

I see 3 other penalty strokes, in addition to your 4.

[LobWedge]

Two of your 4 penalty strokes come from playing from a wrong place and because it was a serious breach (he should have played from the tee) he was disqualified.

What were the other two for?

I see 3 other penalty strokes, in addition to your 4.

Okay, this is what I ended up with.

1 - stroke from tee
Can't declare a provisional under 26-1
2 - stroke and distance
3 - next stroke from tee with substituted ball
4 & 5 - for pocketing "provisional" (which is actually now the ball in play), 18-2a(i)
6 & 7 - playing from wrong place, 20-7c

IMO, the remainder of the strokes do not count because of Note 1 in 20-7. Even though he has played out the hole without correcting his error "he has gained a significant advantage as a result of playing from a wrong place" and is disqualified on that point, and not because of a failure to correct the mistake before playing from the next tee.