2 Balls on green on same line....

[Bulls9999]

2 Balls on the same line to the hole on a green (one inside the other) ... if one fixes their ball mark, are they improving someone else's line?

What's the scoop (without readily looking up the answer, lol)

[coralpro]

Originally Posted by Bulls9999

2 Balls on the same line to the hole on a green (one inside the other) ... if one fixes their ball mark, are they improving someone else's line?

What's the scoop (without readily looking up the answer, lol)

Anyone can fix a ball mark anywhere on the green even if it's in the line of putt from ball to the cup. You just can't fix other irregularities like spike marks, where a tree limb landed or perhaps a weed is growing by stomping or pressing it down. It has never made sense to me that you can fix a ball mark but you can't fix a spike mark. Oh well, rules are rules.

[HackBlack]

It might depend on who's away. If Player 1 is out, he can fix the ball mark. Then, when it's Player 2's turn he can fix whatevery you did.

But, lets say Player 1 is out and he doesn't want the ball mark fixed. If he tells this to Player 2 not to fix it and Player 2 ignores Player one and repairs it, I believe Player 2 would be in violation of the rules (like you said, though, that's w/o looking it up)

I think there was a quiz similar to the above in a recent golf magazine. But, it may have been regarding loose impediments in the putting line.

[coralpro]

Originally Posted by HackBlack

It might depend on who's away. If Player 1 is out, he can fix the ball mark. Then, when it's Player 2's turn he can fix whatevery you did.

But, lets say Player 1 is out and he doesn't want the ball mark fixed. If he tells this to Player 2 not to fix it and Player 2 ignores Player one and repairs it, I believe Player 2 would be in violation of the rules (like you said, though, that's w/o looking it up)

I think there was a quiz similar to the above in a recent golf magazine. But, it may have been regarding loose impediments in the putting line.

I might be able to see a loose impediment that someone wanted to use as a reference for their putt but as far as I know anyone can fix a ball mark no matter if the other player wants it left or not. I think it would fall more under a courtesy issue not breaking a rule. Say a player that is out says leave the ball mark and I will repair it after I putt that would be a reasonable request but the player might repair it anyway if he thought it might take the person out of his game in competition.

[Bulls9999]

Yea, that's what I meant. Got the idea while watching my son play in one of his junior golf tournaments....both kids were on the same line, one inside the other (maybe one 10 foot away and the other 15 foot away)....both were busy fixing ball marks at the same time while the other kids were lining up their putts, and my mind starting wondering, ahem, is that allowable for the inside guy to fix a mark on the outside guys line?...before it's his turn to putt?

Originally Posted by HackBlack

It might depend on who's away. If Player 1 is out, he can fix the ball mark. Then, when it's Player 2's turn he can fix whatevery you did.

But, lets say Player 1 is out and he doesn't want the ball mark fixed. If he tells this to Player 2 not to fix it and Player 2 ignores Player one and repairs it, I believe Player 2 would be in violation of the rules (like you said, though, that's w/o looking it up)

I think there was a quiz similar to the above in a recent golf magazine. But, it may have been regarding loose impediments in the putting line.

[atticusfinch]

Originally Posted by Bulls9999

2 Balls on the same line to the hole on a green (one inside the other) ... if one fixes their ball mark, are they improving someone else's line?

What's the scoop (without readily looking up the answer, lol)

Dec16-1c/3: Q. A and B are playing a match. At a par-3 hole, both are on the green with their tee shots. A’s ball comes to rest four feet from the hole. B’s ball is fifteen feet from the hole. Upon reaching the green, A prepares to repair his ball mark. B tells A not to do so until he (B) has putted because A’s ball mark is so situated that B’s ball might be deflected into the hole by it. A objects, stating that he wishes to repair his ball mark immediately. May A do so?

A. No. If A were to repair the ball mark, he would lose the hole under Rule 1-2. A has no right to repair a ball mark affecting B’s play if B requests A not to repair it, unless the ball mark also physically affects A’s play and it is A’s turn to play

[coralpro]

Originally Posted by atticusfinch

Dec16-1c/3: Q. A and B are playing a match. At a par-3 hole, both are on the green with their tee shots. A’s ball comes to rest four feet from the hole. B’s ball is fifteen feet from the hole. Upon reaching the green, A prepares to repair his ball mark. B tells A not to do so until he (B) has putted because A’s ball mark is so situated that B’s ball might be deflected into the hole by it. A objects, stating that he wishes to repair his ball mark immediately. May A do so?

A. No. If A were to repair the ball mark, he would lose the hole under Rule 1-2. A has no right to repair a ball mark affecting B’s play if B requests A not to repair it, unless the ball mark also physically affects A’s play and it is A’s turn to play

That is one goofy rule. B has the option to re repair it if he likes. That is match play though and they do have a few unique rules. I'll have to look up stroke play ruling.

[coralpro]

That is what I thought. The afore mentioned ruling only pertains to match play. The rules permit the golfer in stroke play the right to repair any ball mark their ball made without penalty and any person can repair it a second time if they so choose as long as it can be determined it was a ball mark. I believe the only stipulation they listed was that it cannot be fixed as to aid in making the next stroke example would be a ball mark by the edge of the hole was fixed leaving a little ridge that might deflect the ball towards the hole.

[atticusfinch]

Originally Posted by coralpro

That is what I thought. The afore mentioned ruling only pertains to match play. The rules permit the golfer in stroke play the right to repair any ball mark their ball made without penalty and any person can repair it a second time if they so choose as long as it can be determined it was a ball mark. I believe the only stipulation they listed was that it cannot be fixed as to aid in making the next stroke example would be a ball mark by the edge of the hole was fixed leaving a little ridge that might deflect the ball towards the hole.

Even if it is in the line of a fellow competitor and the FC says he does not want the mark repaired? Can you point to the rule or decison that says that? Note that the decision I quoted refers to rule 1-2 as the source of the penalty. Rule 1-2 applies to both stroke and match play.

[atticusfinch]

Originally Posted by Bulls9999

2 Balls on the same line to the hole on a green (one inside the other) ... if one fixes their ball mark, are they improving someone else's line?

What's the scoop (without readily looking up the answer, lol)

Before this takes off and leaves you unanswered....yes, if you repair a ball mark on someone else's line of putt you are (arguably) improving the line. However, the rules permit such improvement, unless asked not to by the other player.

[coralpro]

Originally Posted by atticusfinch

Even if it is in the line of a fellow competitor and the FC says he does not want the mark repaired? Can you point to the rule or decison that says that? Note that the decision I quoted refers to rule 1-2 as the source of the penalty. Rule 1-2 applies to both stroke and match play.

The rule you quoted said in match play. It didn't say a thing about stroke play. What I've found is that never read into a rule something it doesn't state. I believe it was 16-1c that allows a player to mark his ball in stroke play but I will confirm that and post it. It left no discretion to another player saying he didn't want it repaired. Just edited post to ad the c.

[coralpro]

Originally Posted by atticusfinch

Before this takes off and leaves you unanswered....yes, if you repair a ball mark on someone else's line of putt you are (arguably) improving the line. However, the rules permit such improvement, unless asked not to by the other player.

Why would there be an arguement? The rules permit you to return the green to the same condition before you made your approach shot which is its intent. Repairing a ball mark shouldn't ever be perceived as improving a lie or we will have every rules buff not fixing any divots then you'll be putting on the moons' surface. The only bad ruling in my opinion is not being able to fix spike marks. I believe it is so because there is too much indescretion on whether something is truly a spike mark or whether someone is just improving the area of intended stroke.

[atticusfinch]

Originally Posted by coralpro

Why would there be an arguement? The rules permit you to return the green to the same condition before you made your approach shot which is its intent. Repairing a ball mark shouldn't ever be perceived as improving a lie or we will have every rules buff not fixing any divots then you'll be putting on the moons' surface. The only bad ruling in my opinion is not being able to fix spike marks. I believe it is so because there is too much indescretion on whether something is truly a spike mark or whether someone is just improving the area of intended stroke.

I'm not following you. We were talking about improving the line of putt, not the lie of the ball.

[Bulls9999]

OK, I think I found the specific rule that addresses this:

13-2/36 Competitor Sanctions Repair of Spike Damage on His Line of Putt by Fellow-Competitor


Q. If a fellow-competitor purposely improves the competitor’s line of putt by repairing spike damage, the fellow-competitor is penalized under Rule 1-2. If the fellow-competitor’s action is sanctioned, tacitly or otherwise, by the competitor, is the competitor also subject to penalty?

A. Yes, under Rule 13-2, for allowing his line of play to be improved.
-----------------------------------------

Others that may apply:

1-2/1 Line of Putt Altered Purposely by Opponent or Fellow-Competitor by Stepping on It


Q. An opponent or a fellow-competitor purposely steps on the player’s line of putt with the intention either of improving the line (e.g., by pressing down a raised tuft of grass) or of damaging it (e.g., by making spike marks). What is the ruling?

A. In either case, the opponent or the fellow-competitor was in breach of Rule 1-2. The penalty is loss of hole in match play or two strokes in stroke play, unless the Committee decides to impose a penalty of disqualification — see Note under Rule 1-2.
In stroke play if the line of putt has been damaged, the player, in equity (Rule 1-4), may restore the line of putt to its previous condition. A player is entitled to the lie and line of putt he had when his ball came to rest. The line of putt may be restored by anyone.

Competitor Sanctions Repair of Spike Damage on His Line of Putt by Fellow-Competitor — See 13-2/36.Loose Impediments Brushed Along Line of Putt Rather Than to Side — See 16-1a/10.Line of Putt Damaged Accidentally by Opponent, Fellow-Competitor or Their Caddies— See 16-1a/13.Ball Lifted on Putting Green Placed Ahead of Ball-Marker and Then Moved Back to Original Position — See 16-1a/17.Ball Mark in Position to Assist Opponent Repaired by Player — See 16-1c/2.Placing Object Marking Position of Ball in Front of Ball — See 20-1/19.1-2/1.5 Competitor Alters Line of Play of Fellow-Competitor


Q. In stroke play, A’s ball is under a partially detached tree branch from which he believes he is entitled to relief without penalty. A calls for a ruling. B, A’s fellow-competitor, argues A’s case to a member of the Committee and, during the conversation, lifts the branch and improves or worsens A’s line of play. What is the ruling?

A. As B’s actions were not made with the intention of improving or worsening A’s line of play, he is not in breach of Rule 1-2. The branch may be replaced, but A is not required to do so. (New)

[atticusfinch]

Originally Posted by Bulls9999

OK, I think I found the specific rule that addresses this:

13-2/36 Competitor Sanctions Repair of Spike Damage on His Line of Putt by Fellow-Competitor


Q. If a fellow-competitor purposely improves the competitor’s line of putt by repairing spike damage, the fellow-competitor is penalized under Rule 1-2. If the fellow-competitor’s action is sanctioned, tacitly or otherwise, by the competitor, is the competitor also subject to penalty?

A. Yes, under Rule 13-2, for allowing his line of play to be improved.
-----------------------------------------

Others that may apply:

1-2/1 Line of Putt Altered Purposely by Opponent or Fellow-Competitor by Stepping on It


Q. An opponent or a fellow-competitor purposely steps on the player’s line of putt with the intention either of improving the line (e.g., by pressing down a raised tuft of grass) or of damaging it (e.g., by making spike marks). What is the ruling?

A. In either case, the opponent or the fellow-competitor was in breach of Rule 1-2. The penalty is loss of hole in match play or two strokes in stroke play, unless the Committee decides to impose a penalty of disqualification — see Note under Rule 1-2.
In stroke play if the line of putt has been damaged, the player, in equity (Rule 1-4), may restore the line of putt to its previous condition. A player is entitled to the lie and line of putt he had when his ball came to rest. The line of putt may be restored by anyone.

Competitor Sanctions Repair of Spike Damage on His Line of Putt by Fellow-Competitor — See 13-2/36.Loose Impediments Brushed Along Line of Putt Rather Than to Side — See 16-1a/10.Line of Putt Damaged Accidentally by Opponent, Fellow-Competitor or Their Caddies— See 16-1a/13.Ball Lifted on Putting Green Placed Ahead of Ball-Marker and Then Moved Back to Original Position — See 16-1a/17.Ball Mark in Position to Assist Opponent Repaired by Player — See 16-1c/2.Placing Object Marking Position of Ball in Front of Ball — See 20-1/19.1-2/1.5 Competitor Alters Line of Play of Fellow-Competitor


Q. In stroke play, A’s ball is under a partially detached tree branch from which he believes he is entitled to relief without penalty. A calls for a ruling. B, A’s fellow-competitor, argues A’s case to a member of the Committee and, during the conversation, lifts the branch and improves or worsens A’s line of play. What is the ruling?

A. As B’s actions were not made with the intention of improving or worsening A’s line of play, he is not in breach of Rule 1-2. The branch may be replaced, but A is not required to do so. (New)

I've lost track of what your point is?

Also, based on your quotes, do you agree that the rule applies in match and stroke play?

[atticusfinch]

Originally Posted by coralpro

That is what I thought. The afore mentioned ruling only pertains to match play. The rules permit the golfer in stroke play the right to repair any ball mark their ball made without penalty and any person can repair it a second time if they so choose as long as it can be determined it was a ball mark. I believe the only stipulation they listed was that it cannot be fixed as to aid in making the next stroke example would be a ball mark by the edge of the hole was fixed leaving a little ridge that might deflect the ball towards the hole.

I still haven't seen where you get this. What rule limits the decision to match play?

Let me ask this. If the exact same scenario as in dec Dec16-1c/3 happened in a stroke play event, what would your ruling be?

[coralpro]

Originally Posted by atticusfinch

I still haven't seen where you get this. What rule limits the decision to match play?

Let me ask this. If the exact same scenario as in dec Dec16-1c/3 happened in a stroke play event, what would your ruling be?

The rule you stated ONLY applies to match play because it expresses the wording "in match play" The rule I listed says a person can fix their divot without penalty and doesn't state whether a person can protest or ask for it not to be fixed. Since it doesn't state an objection alternative, the rule stands as anyone can fix a divot without penalty and it can also be rerepaired if another player deems it necessary without incurring a penalty. Match play is a whole different animal and does have a few quirky rulings. That is the reason I stated never read something into a rule it doesn't state. They try to make them as simple as possible and it is US, as players, that sometimes try to twist their meanings.

[atticusfinch]

Originally Posted by coralpro

The rule you stated ONLY applies to match play because it expresses the wording "in match play" The rule I listed says a person can fix their divot without penalty and doesn't state whether a person can protest or ask for it not to be fixed. Since it doesn't state an objection alternative, the rule stands as anyone can fix a divot without penalty and it can also be rerepaired if another player deems it necessary without incurring a penalty. Match play is a whole different animal and does have a few quirky rulings. That is the reason I stated never read something into a rule it doesn't state. They try to make them as simple as possible and it is US, as players, that sometimes try to twist their meanings.

There's a difference between decisions that are placed in a particualr setting to illustrate the rule in question, and those that are limited tothe facts in the decision. Not always easy to see, but that's the way it is, nonetheless.

What is your answer to my question about stroke play with the same facts?

I just emailed this question to the usga:

"Is the result stated in dec 16-2c/2 limited to match play only?"