US/2-3/100 Player Who Wins First Nine Holes in Nassau
Match Withdraws During Second Nine
Q.
The "Nassau" System of
scoring is used in a team match, i.e., in each match three
points are awarded as follows: one point to the winner of
the first nine holes, one point to the winner of the second
nine and one point to the winner over 18 holes. In one
match, a player who had defeated his opponent on the first
nine holes withdrew due to illness during the second nine.
Should the player retain the point he won on the first nine
or, since he withdrew, should he lose all three points?
A.
The player should be
awarded one point; his opponent won the other two points by
default.
US/4-1/100 Clubface Markings
Q.
May a player use a golf
club with a groove spacing to groove width ratio of 2.3 to
1, if that club was manufactured before March 31, 1990, even
though Appendix II 5c(i) requires that the groove spacing to
groove width ratio must be no less than 3 to 1?
A.
Yes. It is, however,
the responsibility of the player to provide proof of the
date on which the club was manufactured. If the player
cannot provide such proof, the club must conform with the
specifications described in Appendix II 5c(i).
[US/5-1/100 Reserved]
US/5-1/101 Status of Ball Not on List of Conforming Golf
Balls
Brands of
balls not appearing on the current List of Conforming Golf
Balls fall into three categories:
1.
Brands which have never been tested,
2.
-Brands which appeared on a previous List but which have
not been re-submitted for inclusion on the current List,
and
3.
-Brands which have been tested and found not to conform
to the Rules and specifications set forth in Appendix
III.
Balls in
categories 1 and 2 are presumed to conform and the onus of
proof is on the person alleging that the ball does not.
All balls of
brands in category 3 are deemed to be non-conforming.
US/5-1/102 Status of Ball to
Be Removed from List of Conforming Golf Balls
Q. A
brand of ball included on the current List of Conforming
Golf Balls is tested further and found not to conform to the
specifications set forth in Appendix III. The brand will
therefore be deleted from the next List published. What is
the status of the ball in the interim period?
A.
Players are entitled to
assume that all balls of a brand included on the current
List of Conforming Golf Balls conform to the Rules and
Appendix III. Accordingly, players may continue to use balls
of the brand in question until the publication of the next
List, unless by a condition of the competition the Committee
has specifically excluded that brand. This applies whether
or not it is a condition of the competition that only brands
of golf balls on the List of Conforming Golf Balls may be
used.
US/6-2a/100 Player in Match
Uses Established Handicap But Handicap Too High Due to
Player's Failure to Observe Provision of Handicap System
Q. A’s
handicap is 23 strokes and B’s is 31. A and B play a
handicap match and B receives 8 strokes, the difference
between 31 and 23. B wins the match, 1 up. A questions B’s
handicap; B admits that he does not adjust his scores under
the Equitable Stroke Control provision of the USGA Handicap
System. It is determined that, if B had adjusted his scores,
his handicap would be 29 strokes. The Committee disqualifies
B under Rule 6-2A. Was the Committee correct?
A.
Rule 6-2a provides:
"Before
starting a match in a handicap competition, the players
should determine from one another their respective
handicaps. If a player begins the match having declared a
higher handicap which would affect the number of strokes
given or received, he shall be disqualified; otherwise, the
player shall play off the declared handicap."
B’s
handicap, although incorrect due to his failure to apply
Equitable Stroke Control, was 31. Accordingly, B was not in
breach of Rule 6-2a and the match should have stood as
played.
As it is
impracticable for a Committee conducting a competition to
determine whether a player has correctly recorded each
score, turned in all scores, etc., for handicap purposes,
the Rules of Golf assume that he has done so. The solution
to a situation such as this is for the Handicap Committee to
take appropriate action against B because of his failure to
apply Equitable Stroke Control to the scores he returned for
handicap purposes.
US/17/100 Flagstick Dimensions
The USGA
recommends that the flagstick be at least seven feet in
height and that its diameter be not greater than
three-quarters of an inch from a point three inches above
the ground to the bottom of the hole.
US/20-1/100 Placing Ball-Marker to Side
Q.If a
player is requested to mark the position of his ball to the
side of where it lies, must he place a ball marker behind
the ball, measure a clubhead-length to the side of the
marker and then move the marker to the side? Or may the
player simply measure a clubhead-length from the side of the
ball and eliminate one step?
A.
The player may measure
from the side of the ball.
US/29/100 Penalty
in "Pinehurst" Foursome Not Related to Ball Holed Out
Q.In a
foursome competition played under the so-called "Pinehurst"
format, A and B were partners. In accordance with the
format, A hit a second shot with B’s ball. B then hit a
second shot with a ball he thought was A’s, but which in
fact was a wrong ball. Since B’s shot with the wrong ball
was a poor one, B picked up the wrong ball and he and A
proceeded to play out the hole with B’s ball. It was then
discovered that the ball B picked up was not A’s ball, but
rather a wrong ball.
Do A and B
incur any penalty because B played a wrong ball in view of
the fact that the hole was completed with B’s ball which was
not related to the play of the wrong ball?
A.
The Rules of Golf do
not cover this form of play.
It is
recommended that a penalty in this form of play should be
incurred only if related to the ball ultimately holed out by
the side. Thus, as the ball played by B from the tee was
ultimately holed out, the side should not have incurred a
penalty because B played a stroke with a wrong ball instead
of A’s ball.
US/33-8/100 Local Rule for Lateral Water Hazard with Bunker
Adjacent
Q.The
18th hole at the Pebble Beach Golf Links is bordered along
the left side by Carmel Bay, and there is a sea wall which
begins more than 100 yards short of the green and extends to
the back of the green. There is a bunker approximately 12
feet wide between the sea wall and the fairway for much of
this distance.
The bay is a
lateral water hazard and the sea wall is the natural margin
of the hazard. Accordingly, a player, when dropping a ball
under Rule 26-1c(i), must drop in the bunker. The sand at
this point is soft and a dropped ball usually plugs.
Would it be
permissible to place the line defining the lateral water
hazard along the right edge of the bunker, making the bunker
part of the lateral water hazard, or alternatively, make a
Local Rule to the effect that, when obtaining relief under
the lateral water hazard Rule, the player may drop a ball to
the right of the bunker?
A.
In all cases, the
hazard should be marked along its natural boundary, i.e.,
the sea wall — see Decision 33-2a/4.
If the
Committee does not wish to require a player to drop a ball
in the bunker when proceeding under the lateral water hazard
Rule, the Committee may establish a series of Ball Drops
along the right-hand side of the bunker and make a Local
Rule stating that a player whose ball comes to rest in the
lateral water hazard (having last crossed the hazard margin
at a point where, when proceeding under Rule 26-1c(i), the
player may drop a ball in the bunker) may drop a ball, under
penalty of one stroke, on the nearest Ball Drop which is not
nearer the hole.
US/33-8/101 Local Rule for Breach of Sportsmanship Code
Q.A high
school federation has a sportsmanship code for golfers who
compete in high school matches.
May the
federation make a Local Rule assessing a penalty for a
breach of the code?
A.
A Local Rule assessing
a penalty for a breach of a sportsmanship code is not
authorized. Penalties for a breach of a sportsmanship code
should take a more generalized form, e.g., subjection to
censure, suspension or revocation of the privilege of
playing in events.
[US/33-8/102 Reserved]
US/34-3/100 Committee
Intervention in Match Play
In the
absence of a referee, a Committee has no authority to
intervene in match play unless there is a reason to believe
Rule 1-3 is being infringed or a breach of Rule 6-7 is
involved. When there is no referee, the players must protect
their own rights by invoking Rule 2-5 and by referring to
the Committee any dispute they cannot resolve — see Rule
34-3.
US/34-3/101 Committee
Intervention in Match Play When Search for Lost Ball Exceeds
Five Minutes
Q.
Decision US/34-3/100
permits a Committee member to intervene in a match to which
a referee has not been assigned in case of a breach of Rule
6-7 (Undue Delay).
Would it be
in order for a Committee member to intervene in such a match
if he has observed that a player has looked for his ball for
five minutes and is continuing to search?
A. Yes. It would
be appropriate for a Committee member to intervene and
advise the player that the ball is lost under the Rules and,
if he does not resume play immediately, a penalty for undue
delay will result.
