Another where to drop Q...

[Gary Hill]

nor the Soldiers' lines

Friendly lines. 1 club length.
Enemy lines. 2 club lengths.

[DCH]

Note 1: Stakes or lines used to define a water hazard must be yellow. When both stakes and lines are used to define water hazards, the stakes identify the hazard and the lines define the hazard margin.

There is nothing in there that says stakes define the margin. The only use of the word margin is in respect of lines.
In fact, it doesn't (in the definition) say that stakes (or lines) must be used.
Rule 33 simply requires the Committe accurately to define the margins of water hazards.
The only imperative in the Definition is that any stakes and lines must be yellow.

[Gary Hill]

There is nothing in there that says stakes define the margin.

I agree in principle.

However, IF the Committee has used stakes to define the margins of the water hazards, then those stakes DO define the margin of the water hazard.

That is NOT the same as "Stakes on their own may simply identify the presence of a water hazard."

If there are no stakes, then the hazard margin is not defined by stakes.

If there ARE stakes, then the hazard margin IS defined by the stakes.

You CANNOT have a hazard that is defined by stakes on their own where the stakes have no meaning with respect to the margins of the hazard.

[DCH]

If there ARE stakes, then the hazard margin IS defined by the stakes.

But not if there are lines also.


However, you did say you would answer my question which I asked first:

I can't find a rule saying how the Committee must define the margins.
If you can tell me which it is I would be grateful.

["Richard"]

I love this one..,..

You are not to remove Stones, Bones...

BONES??? Where was this golf course?

[Kilroy]

Scotland. Home of hagis, bagpipes, and golf.

[Gary Hill]

But not if there are lines also.

That is NOT the same as "Stakes on their own may simply identify the presence of a water hazard."

I can't find a rule saying how the Committee must define the margins.
If you can tell me which it is I would be grateful.

Here is the direct quote from the book.

The Definitions of Water Hazard and Later Water Hazard: yellow stakes or lines should be used to mark water hazards and red stakes or lines designate lateral water hazards.

[broken27]

I can't find a rule saying how the Committee must define the margins.
If you can tell me which it is I would be grateful.

It's not a rule, it's in the definitions section:

Water Hazard
A “water hazard’’ is any sea, lake, pond, river, ditch, surface drainage ditch or other open water course (whether or not containing water) and anything of a similar nature on the course.
All ground or water within the margin of a water hazard is part of the water hazard. The margin of a water hazard extends vertically upward and downward. Stakes and lines defining the margins of water hazards are in the hazards. Such stakes are obstructions. A ball is in a water hazard when it lies in or any part of it touches the water hazard.
Note 1: Stakes or lines used to define a water hazardmust be yellow. When both stakes and lines are used to define water hazards, the stakes identify the hazard and the lines define the hazard margin.

Lateral Water Hazard
A “lateral water hazard’’ is a water hazard or that part of a water hazard so situated that it is not possible or is deemed by the Committee to be impracticable to drop a ball behind the water hazard in accordance with Rule 26-1b.
That part of a water hazard to be played as a lateral water hazard should be distinctively marked. A ball is in a lateral water hazard when it lies in or any part of it touches the lateral water hazard.
Note 1: Stakes or lines used to define a lateral water hazard must be red. When both stakes and lines are used to define lateral water hazards, the stakes identify the hazard and the lines define the hazard margin.
Note 2: The Committee may make a Local Rule prohibiting play from an environmentally-sensitive area defined as a lateral water hazard.
Note 3: The Committee may define a lateral water hazard as a water hazard.

[Gary Hill]

I don't know what book you are using

The R.C.G.A. "Responsibilities of Tournament Committees" book.

It is available from the R.C.G.A. if you wish to read it.

Perhaps you should learn the Rules of Golf before you try to learn the duties and obligations of the Committee.

FYI - The definitions of "should" and "must" in the Rules of Golf do not apply to the Committee Responsibilites book.

[DCH]

FYI - The definitions of "should" and "must" in the Rules of Golf do not apply to the Committee Responsibilites book.

I am surprised that the RCGA would choose to apply different meaning to words relating to the Rules of Golf when the R&A are the ruling body. Do the RCGA have an equivilant list of word use in their book showing when they vary from the R&A's use?

[Kilroy]

I saw it early this morning with italics. I did not touch it. Gary is the moderator, but I don't see a reason for him changing it.

That being said, this is a Canadian board and here we follow the RCGA rules and guidelines Therfore the rulings Gary gives will always be according to the RCGA not the R&A.

There are minor diffrences in rules and guidelines between the R&A, RCGA, and USGA. The R&A governs golf where you live, and is older than the other two associations, but to say "the RCGA was not resposible for the Rules but that the authority is the R&A" is only true in the parts of the world where the R&A has jurisdiction. Not here in Canada.

[Kilroy]

I did however edit thotho's post. Thotho, please do not waste people's bandwidth by posting every smily on the site in a message. Some people are still on dial up. Forums are fun, but please keep the clowning around to a reasonable level.

[DCH]

The R&A governs golf where you live, and is older than the other two associations, but to say "the RCGA was not resposible for the Rules but that the authority is the R&A" is only true in the parts of the world where the R&A has jurisdiction. Not here in Canada.

Thanks for you response Dan
Sorry, I got it wrong about R&A and RCGA. Canada in fact comes under the USGA jurisdiction but the R&A and the USGA jointly issue and update the 'Rules of Golf'.
The RCGA administers and oversees the Rules of Golf and Amateur Status in Canada. It has the exclusive right to publish and distribute the Rules of Golf throughout Canada - but not to make or alter them. That authority resides with the R&A and the USGA.

So my question of Gary is why would the RGCA have a different meaning for the word ' should' that the USGA have specified in the Rules book.

RGCA: The Definitions of Water Hazard and Later Water Hazard: yellow stakes or lines should be used to mark water hazards and red stakes or lines designate lateral water hazards

USGA Rule book 'should' = recommendation

[Kilroy]

Canada in fact comes under the USGA jurisdiction

I always thought the RCGA was more closely aligned with the policies of the R&A than wth the USGA, but independant. For example, when you go to the RCGA site amd access Rules - Decisions, it leads you to the R&A site, but the USGA has their own decisions.

[Gary Hill]

DCH - I deleted your post.

I delete posts at my discretion which are confusing to the readers or incorrect information.

Please read the Golf Forum Management Rules.

This forum is intented to advance the understanding of the Rules of Golf for all.

You may private message or email me if you are having a particular problem understating a Rule, but continually posting incorrect information is counterproductive to all.

[Gary Hill]

I am surprised that the RCGA would choose to apply different meaning to words relating to the Rules of Golf when the R&A are the ruling body.

Absolutely incorrect.

The governing body for the Rules of Golf in Canada is the Royal Canadian Golf Association.

[Gary Hill]

Sorry, I got it wrong about R&A and RCGA. Canada in fact comes under the USGA jurisdiction

Absolutely incorrect.

Canada does NOT COME UNDER ANYONE'S JURISTICTION.

but the R&A and the USGA jointly issue and update the 'Rules of Golf'.

Absolutely incorrect.

The R&A, the USGA, AND THE RCGA jointly issue and update the 'Rules of Golf'.[/QUOTE]

but not to make or alter them. That authority resides with the R&A and the USGA.

Absolutely incorrect.

[Gary Hill]

I always thought the RCGA was more closely aligned with the policies of the R&A than wth the USGA, but independant. For example, when you go to the RCGA site amd access Rules - Decisions, it leads you to the R&A site, but the USGA has their own decisions.

Whether or not the governing bodies choose to post the complete Decisions on their website is irrelevant.

There is only ONE RULE BOOK AND ONE DECISION BOOK for all world-wide.

No matter where or by whom the books are published THEY ARE VERBATIM COPIES.

[Kilroy]

That is indeed a lot of misinformation. Thanks Gary.

[Kilroy]

Whether or not the governing bodies choose to post the complete Decisions on their website is irrelevant.

Yes I see, but I had always understood that the RCGA was more closely aligned with the R&A than the USGA, and the web link seemed to support that.
So they are completely independant. Good to know.

[Gary Hill]

They may be aligned more closely by tradition, but all three bodies meet together twice a year to discuss Rules changes. Meeting places are alternated between North America and England.

[Kilroy]

So what association governs Japan, Korea etc. Otherwise known as the "rest of the world".

[Gary Hill]

So what association governs Japan, Korea etc. Otherwise known as the "rest of the world".

The R&A is the governing body for everywhere other than the United States (including Mexico) and Canada.